Final Order 1

Order Details: Ex-parte Judgement
Pdf Text: Presented on 08.01.2018
Registered on 08.02.2018
Decided on 16.10.2018
Duration Yrs. M. Days
08 08
CNR No.
EXH.
IN THE BOMBAY CITY CIVIL COURT AT BOMBAY
SUIT NO.384 OF 2018
M/s. ProGreen Sports Infra,
a division of SmP Enterprises Pvt.Ltd., a
company incorporated under the Companies
Act, 1956, having their registered office at
32, Pathak Wadi, Tavawala Building, Lohar
Chawl, Mumbai400 002, through their
Director Mr.Dharmendra S. Shah, aged
about 52 years. ...Plaintiff.
V/s.
Royal Marwar Hospitality Pvt.Ltd.
A Company incorporated under the
Companies Act, having is office at C/o.
Mirah Dekor Pvt.Ltd., 208, 2nd floor, Parvati
Industrial Estate, Sun Mill Compound,
Lower Parel (W), Mumbai400 013, and at
Umeid Heritage, Ratnada, Jodhpur – 342
001. ...Defendant
Appearances:
Ld. Adv.Mr. Kamlesh Shetty for plaintiff.
None for defendant. Hence, suit proceeded exparte against defendant.
MHCC01-000798-2018
-- 1 of 6 --
.. j/2 .. Suit No.384/2018
CORAM : HIS HONOUR JUDGE
SHRI ABHIJEET A.
NANDGAONKAR
(C.R. No.20)
DATED : 17th October,2018
J U D G M E N T
(Exparte)
This is a suit for recovery of Rs.87,862/ with interest.
2. In short it is the case of plaintiff that, plaintiff is a company
incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956 having their registered
office at the address mentioned in the title clause. Plaintiff is a division
of SMP Enterprises Pvt.Ltd and is carrying on business of trading in Turf
and other sports goods. Defendant is also a company incorporated
under the Companies Act, 1956 having their office at the address
mentioned in the title clause.
3. Plaintiff submitted that, in pursuance of the purchase orders
bearing Nos.Jodhpur/C/RMHPL/001/201514 dt.15.04.2015 and No.
Jodhpur/C/RMHPL/005/201514 10.07.2015 and instructions, plaintiff
sold, supplied and delivered to defendants the ordered goods and
material of total value of Rs.7,07,575/ and raised invoices bearing
NO.FT/0009/1516 dt.21/.05.2015 for Rs.4,65,000/ and
No.FT/0026/1516 dt.10.08.2015 for Rs.2,42,575/. Defendant have
raised their purchase orders through their Email to plaintiff. The goods
were dispatched and delivered through M/s. VTrans (India) Ltd on
28.05.2015 and 18.08.2015 vide lorry receipts. Defendant accepted the
goods and invoices without raising any doubts regarding quantity,
quality or price thereof. Defendant agreed to make advance payment
-- 2 of 6 --
.. j/3 .. Suit No.384/2018
of 50% and balance 50% payment after delivery of goods. However,
defendant was irregular in payment of goods.
4. Plaintiff further submitted that, they have maintained books of
accounts and as per accounts as on 12.08.2016 defendant was due and
payable Rs.71,288/. In spite of repeated requests and demand
defendant did not make payment. Therefore, ultimately plaintiff issued
notice through Advocate on 22.07.2017 and called upon defendant to
pay balance amount of Rs.71,288/ with interest. In spite of receipt of
notice defendant failed to comply the notice. Therefore, defendant
approached to this Court against the defendant. Hence, this suit.
5. Writ of summons came to be issued against defendant. It was
duly served upon defendant. Accordingly plaintiff filed service affidavit
at Exh.2. In spite of service defendant failed to appear before the
Court. Therefore, suit proceeded exparte against defendant on
19.06.2018.
6. To prove its claim, plaintiff/company tendered chiefinaffidavit
of Dharmendra Shah at Exh.3 with compilation of documents at Exh.4
and proved the following documents in the testimony of its witness.
Ex. Particular
5 True extract copy of the plaintiff's Board resolution dt.
02/12/2017.
6 The defendant's purchase orders.
7 Office copies of the plaintiff two invoices.
8 Consignor copies of two lorry receipts.
-- 3 of 6 --
.. j/4 .. Suit No.384/2018
9 Defendant completion certificate dt. 07/10/2015.
10 Defendant consolidated statement of account in the books
of account the plaintiff.
11 Office copy of the plaintiff dv. Legal notice dt. 22/07/2017.
12 Two postal receipts dt. 22/07/2017,
13 One postal acknowledgement duly signed by the defendant
and one returned registered AD packet in originals.
Plaintiff closed their evidence by filing pursis at Exh.14.
7. Heard learned Advocate for plaintiff. Perused the record and
submissions.
8. It is evident from the record, particularly purchase order, invoices
and lorry receipts it is clear that, defendants have ordered the goods
from time to time vide purchase order and plaintiff sold and supplied
the same, which had been received by defendant. Even defendant
company have accepted the invoices without raising any doubts over
the goods, there quality and/or price thereof. Therefore, it is proved
that, defendant accepted the goods. As per agreed terms defendant has
to make 50% payment as advance and 50% after receipt of goods.
However, defendant was irregular in payment. Which clearly shows
intention of defendant. Because in spite of repeated requests and
demands, defendant failed and neglected to pay the outstanding
amount to plaintiff. A lackadaisical attitude of defendant also clearly
shows that in spite of service of writ of this Court they or anybody on
behalf of them not appeared to contest the suit. Therefore, testimony of
plaintiff's witness and their claims remains unchallenged and
-- 4 of 6 --
.. j/5 .. Suit No.384/2018
unrebutted. The documents proved by plaintiff also remain
uncontroverted. Hence, I have no hesitation to accept the unchallenged
testimony of plaintiff and their claim in toto.
9. From the beginning of the transaction between both the parties,
defendant was irregular and did not adhere to the terms and
conditions, as agreed by them. Defendant was irregular in payment.
Therefore, being a business transaction defendant is liable to pay
interest as agreed to plaintiff on the outstanding due and payable
amount. As defendant failed and neglected to make the payment to
plaintiff, in spite of repeated demand, requests and even issuance of
demand notice; forced plaintiff to file suit. Therefore, costs of this suit
needs to be saddled upon defendant. In such circumstances, suit
deserves to be decreed with costs and hence, I proceed to pass the
following order :
O R D E R
1. Suit is decreed with costs.
2. Defendant do pay Rs.87,862/ to plaintiff with interest
@ 18% per annum on principal outstanding amount
from the date of filing of this suit till realization of
entire decreetal amount.
3. Defendant do bear their own costs and costs of
plaintiff.
4. Decree be drawn up accordingly.
( ABHIJEET A. NANDGAONKAR )
Judge, (C.R.No.20)
Dt.:17/10/2018 City Civil Court, Gr. Mumbai
Dictated on : 17.10.2018
Transcribed on : 19.10.2018
Signed on : 19.10.2018 kps/
-- 5 of 6 --
.. j/6 .. Suit No.384/2018
“CERTIFIED TOBE TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF THE ORIGINAL
SIGNED JUDGMENT/ORDER”
20.10.2018 at 10.59 a.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 17.10.2018
Judgment/order signed by P.O. on 19.10.2018
Judgment/order uploaded on 20.10.2018
-- 6 of 6 --