Final Order 1

Order Details: Ex-parte Judgement
Pdf Text: Presented on 08.01.2018
Registered on 16.03.2018
Decided on 26.04.2019
Duration Yrs. M. Days
01 10
CNR No.
EXH.
IN THE BOMBAY CITY CIVIL COURT AT BOMBAY
SUMMARY SUIT NO.329 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.
Shamash Entertainment Pvt.Ltd., a
Company incorporated under the provisions
of the Companies Act, 1956 having its office
at Playboy Club, Hyderabad, Novotel And
Hicc Complex, HiTech City, Post Bag No.
1101, Cyberabad Post Office, Telangana,
Hyderabad – 500 081. ...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 : 26th April,2019
MHCC01-000816-2018
-- 1 of 6 --
.. j/2 .. Summary Suit No.329/2018
J U D G M E N T
(Exparte)
This is a suit for recovery of Rs.2,44,413/ 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 company incorporated under the companies Act, 1956 having their
address mentioned in the title clause. Defendant is a
customer/constituent of plaintiff. Plaintiff carrying business interalia
as Publishers of Magazine, 'Vogue India', 'GQ India', ' Architectural
Digest India', 'Conde Nast Traveller India' amongst others.
3. Plaintiff submitted that, on or about December,2014 defendant
approached to plaintiff with a request to publish the advertisement in
respect of brand known as “PLAYBOY CLUBNOVOTEL” in “The Vogue
Food and Drink Guide 2015”. Accordingly, defendant issued an
undated release order in plaintiff's favour and pursuant to the said
Release Order, plaintiff published the advertisement of the brand
“PLAYBOY CLUBNOVOTEL” in “The Vogue Food and Drink Guide
2015”. The said advertisement was as per specifications of the
defendant. Accordingly plaintiff has raised their invoices on defendant
in the sum of Rs.1,50,000/ vide Invoice No.AD/1415/2187 on
10.12.2014.
4. Plaintiff submitted that above invoices are duly received by
defendant without any objection. Therefore, defendant are due and
-- 2 of 6 --
.. j/3 .. Summary Suit No.329/2018
liable to pay the amount of the invoices to plaintiff. However,
defendant did not make the same. Therefore, plaintiff issued notice
through Advocate dt.04.05.2016 calling upon defendant to make
payment. But said notice returned back. Therefore, plaintiff issued
another notice dt.20.07.2016. The said notice was duly delivered to
defendant. However, defendant neither made the payment nor replied
the notice. 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 defendant for recovery of outstanding
amount.
5. Writ of summons of this suit served upon defendant. Affidavit of
service is filed at Exh.2. 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.3
and list of documents at Exh.4. Plaintiff proved the following
documents during the course of trial :
Exh.5 Copy of release order.
Exh.6 Copy of invoice dt.10.12.2014 bearing NO.AD/1415/2178.
Exh.7 Original legal notice dt.04.05.2015 together with
acknowledgment card.
7. Heard learned Advocate for plaintiff. Perused record and
proceedings.
-- 3 of 6 --
.. j/4 .. Summary Suit No.329/2018
8. On perusal of the record it appears that on behalf of defendant 1
the order was placed to plaintiff for publication. After publishing the
advertisement plaintiff raised invoice and which was 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 is 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.329/2018
O R D E R
1. Suit is decreed with costs.
2. Defendant do pay Rs.2,44,413/ along with interest
@ 21 percent per annum on principal amount of
Rs.1,50,000/ 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.: 26/04/2019 City Civil Court, Gr. Mumbai
Dictated on : 26.04.2019
Transcribed on : 30.04.2019
Signed on : 30.04.2019
kps/
-- 5 of 6 --
.. j/6 .. Summary Suit No.329/2018
“CERTIFIED TOBE TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF THE ORIGINAL
SIGNED JUDGMENT/ORDER”
30.04.2019 at 5.42 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 26.04.2019
Judgment/order signed by P.O. on 30.04.2019
Judgment/order uploaded on 30.04.2019
-- 6 of 6 --