Full Order Text
Final Order 1 · 29 Jan 2019 · CNR MHCC010005242018
Order Details: Ex-parte Judgement Pdf Text: Presented on 11.01.2018 Registered on 16.03.2018 Decided on 29.01.2019 Duration Yrs. M. Days 10 13 CNR No. EXH. IN THE BOMBAY CITY CIVIL COURT AT BOMBAY SUMMARY SUIT NO.331 OF 2018 Conde Nast (India) Pvt.Ltd. A Company incorporated under the provisions of the Companies Act, 1956 having its office at 2nd floor, Darabshaw House, Ballard Estate, Shoorji Vallabhdas Marg, Mumbai400 001. ...Plaintiff. V/s. Red Advertising, a Company registered under the provisions of the Companies Act,1956 (as amended) having its registered office at 1b, Ground Floor, Coral Woods Appts, 10/15, Sriram Nagar South Street, Alwarpet, Chennai600 018 ...Defendant. Appearances: Ld. Adv Ms.Radha Kapadia for plaintiff. None for defendant. Hence, suit proceeded exparte against defendant. CORAM : HIS HONOUR JUDGE SHRI ABHIJEET A. NANDGAONKAR (C.R.No.20) DATED : 29th January,2019 MHCC01-000524-2018 -- 1 of 6 -- .. j/2 .. Summary Suit No.331/2018 J U D G M E N T This is a suit for recovery of Rs.9,09,671/ with interest. 2. In short, plaintiff came with a case that, plaintiff is a company incorporated under the provisions of Companies Act,1956 having its office at the address mentioned in the cause title of plaint. Defendant is a customer/constituent of the plaintiff. Plaintiff carrying business as Publishers of various nonnews Magazines like, 'Vogue India', 'GQ India', ' Artchitectural Digest India', amongst others. Plaintiff submitted that, defendant approached to plaintiff with a request to publish its advertisement pertaining to the brand “Tulsi Skills” in the October,2016, December,2016 issue and the brad “Artemis Cars” in the March,2017 issue in the plaintiff's magazine Vogue India. The said advertisements as per specifications of defendant, as contained in their three Release Orders dt.14.09.2016, 14.11.2016 and 10.02.2017 respectively, were published by plaintiff in its magazine Vogue India. The said advertisements have appeared as per the specification of defendant. Accordingly plaintiff has raised their invoice on defendant in the aggregate sum of Rs.7,59,688/ towards costs of advertisement that had appeared in plaintiff's magazine Vogue India. The details of the invoice are as under : Sr. Date Invoice NO. Invoice Amount (Rs) Outstanding Amount. 1. 29.10.2016 AD/1617/1577 2,62,438/ 2,62,438/ 2. 15.12.2016 AD/1617/1978 2,48,625/ 2,48,625/ 3. 20.03.2017 AD/1617/2819 2,48,625/ 2,48,625/ Total ... Rs.7,59,688/ -- 2 of 6 -- .. j/3 .. Summary Suit No.331/2018 3. Plaintiff submitted that, above invoices were duly received by defendant in the normal course of business without any raising any dispute with regard to the services rendered by plaintiff. Therefore, defendant is due and liable to pay the amount of the invoices to plaintiff. However, defendant did not make the payment of the same. Therefore, plaintiff issued notice through Advocate dt.30.11.2017 calling upon defendant to make payment. In spite of receipt of notice defendant failed to make the payment. Plaintiff submitted that, in spite if availing services, defendant has failed and neglected to make the payment outstanding against them. Therefore, plaintiff approached to this Court and tendered present suit against defendants for recovery of outstanding amount. 4. Writ of summons of this suit served upon defendant. Affidavit of service is filed. In spite of service defendant has not appeared nor contested the suit. Hence, suit proceeded exparte against defendant. In support of its claim plaintiff tendered claim affidavit at Exh.5 and list of documents at Exh.6. Plaintiff proved the following documents during the course of trial. Exh.07 Exh.08 Exh.09 Exh.10 Exh.11 Exh.12 Exh.13 Copy of release order dt.14.09.2016 Copy of release order dt.14.11.2016 Copy of release order dt.10.02.2017 Copy of invoice bearing NO.AD/1617/1577. Copy of invoice bearing NO.AD/1617/1978. Copy of invoice bearing NO.AD/1617/2819. Copy of legal notice dt.30.11.2017 together with acknowledgement card. 5. Heard learned Advocate for plaintiff. Perused record and proceedings. -- 3 of 6 -- .. j/4 .. Summary Suit No.331/2018 6. On perusal of the release orders at Exh.7 to 9, it is crystal clear, on behalf of defendant the order was placed to plaintiff for publication of defendant's brand on plaintiff's magazine. After publishing the advertisement plaintiff raised invoices and which were duly accepted by defendant without any demur. Therefore, it is legal liability of defendant to pay the amount of invoices issued against them by plaintiff. In spite of several requests and reminders defendant did not make the payment. Even they have failed and neglected to pay the outstanding dues after receipt of notices issued through Advocate by plaintiff. Therefore, it seems that, defendant has been avoided to pay the outstanding amount for the services of plaintiff availed by them. 7. In spite of service of writ of summons none appeared on behalf of defendant. Therefore, claim of plaintiff remains unchallenged and unrebutted. Even the documents proved by plaintiff are uncontroverted. Therefore, I have no hesitation to accept the unchallenged claim of plaintiff. Therefore, suit filed by plaintiff for recovery under O.XXXVII R.2 of C.P.C. needs to be accepted. Defendant neither present nor rebutted the claim of plaintiff. Which clearly establishes the claim of plaintiff and therefore, plaintiff is entitled to recover outstanding due amount with interest @ 21% per annum. In spite of repeated demand and opportunity defendant has not paid the amount. Therefore, costs of this suit needs to be saddled on defendant. 8. The suit remains unchallenged and undefended. Therefore, under partIII, R(E), schedule I of Bombay City Civil & Sessions Court Rule, 1948 plaintiff becomes entitled for refund of 2/3rd court fee voucher, if prayed. In the result, suit deserves to be decreed with costs. Hence, I proceed to pass the following order : -- 4 of 6 -- .. j/5 .. Summary Suit No.331/2018 O R D E R 1. Suit is decreed with costs. 2. Defendant do pay Rs.9,09,671/ along with interest @ 21 % per annum on principal sum of Rs.7,59,688/ to plaintiff from the date of filing of this suit till realization of entire decreetal amount. 3. Defendant do bear their own costs with costs of plaintiff. 4. Decree be drawn up accordingly. 5. The 2/3rd Court fee refund voucher, as per rule, be issued in favour of plaintiff, if prayed. ( ABHIJEET A. NANDGAONKAR ) Judge, (C.R.No.20) Dt.: 29/01/2019 City Civil Court, Gr. Mumbai Dictated on : 29.01.2019 Transcribed on : 29.01.2019 Signed on : 29.01.2019 kps/ -- 5 of 6 -- .. j/6 .. Summary Suit No.331/2018 “CERTIFIED TOBE TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF THE ORIGINAL SIGNED JUDGMENT/ORDER” 29.01.2019 at 2.45 p.m. UPLOAD DATE AND TIME (KISHOR PRAKASH SHERWADE) NAME OF STENOGRAPHER Name of the Judge HHJ SHRI A.A. NANDGAONKAR (COURT ROOM NO.20) Date of pronouncement of judgment/order 29.01.2019 Judgment/order signed by P.O. on 29.01.2019 Judgment/order uploaded on 29.01.2019 -- 6 of 6 --
