Final Order 1

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.330 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.
Blogmint Digital Private Limited
A Company registered under the provisions
of the Companies Act,1956 (as amended)
having its registered office at 1301B,
Naurang House, Kasturbha Gandhi Marg,
New Delhi – 110001. ...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
MHCC01-000525-2018
-- 1 of 6 --
.. j/2 .. Summary Suit No.330/2018
J U D G M E N T
(Exparte)
This is a suit for recovery of Rs.5,45,019/ 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.
3. Plaintiff submitted that, on or about May,2017 defendant
approached to plaintiff with a request to publish (in June 2017) its
advertisement pertaining to the brand “Pernod Ricard” and “Chivas” on
the plaintiff's website www.vogue.in. The said advertisements as per
specifications of defendant, as contained in their two Release Order
dt.10.05.2017 and 18.05.2017 respectively, were published by plaintiff
on its website www.vogune.in. 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.5,14,862/
towards costs of advertisement that had appeared on plaintiff's website.
The details of the invoice are as under :
Sr. Date Invoice NO. Invoice
Amount (Rs)
Outstanding
Amount.
1. 30.06.2017 DG/1718/0219 2,18,977/
2. 11.10.2017 DG/MU/1718/0134 4,929/
3. 11.10.2017 DG/MU/1718/0135 2,90,956/
Total ... Rs.5,14,862/
-- 2 of 6 --
.. j/3 .. Summary Suit No.330/2018
4. Plaintiff submitted that, above invoices were duly received by
defendant without any objection. 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.20.11.2017 calling upon defendants
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.
5. 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.
6. 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.
Ex.07.
Ex.08.
Exh.10
Exh.11
Exh.12
Copy of release order dt.10.05.2016.
Copy of release order dt.18.07.2017
Copy of invoice bearing NO.DG/MU/1718/0134
dt.11.10.2017.
Copy of invoice bearing NO.DG/MU/1718/0135
dt.11.10.2017.
Copy of legal notice dt.20.11.2017 together with
packet.
7. Heard learned Advocate for plaintiff. Perused record and
proceedings.
-- 3 of 6 --
.. j/4 .. Summary Suit No.330/2018
8. On perusal of the release orders at Exh.7 and 8, it is apparent
that, on behalf of defendant the order was placed to plaintiff for
publication of defendant's brand on plaintiff's website.. After publishing
the advertisement plaintiff raised invoices and which were duly
accepted by defendant without any demur. Therefore, it is legal
liability of defendants 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 availed by them.
9. 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.
10. 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.330/2018
O R D E R
1. Suit is decreed with costs.
2. Defendant do pay Rs.5,45,019/ along with interest
@ 21 % per annum on principal sum of Rs.5,14,862/ to
plaintiff from the date of filing of this suit till realization
of entire decreetal amount.
3. Defendant do bear its 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.330/2018
“CERTIFIED TOBE TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF THE ORIGINAL
SIGNED JUDGMENT/ORDER”
29.01.2019 at 2.46 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 --