Final Order 1

Order Details: Copy of Judgment
Pdf Text: MHCC010016002020
Presented on 06-02-2020
Registered on 10-03-2021
Decided on 06-05-2025
Duration Year Month Days
05 03 00
CNR No. MHCC010016002020
EXH.
IN THE BOMBAY CITY CIVIL COURT AT MAZGAON
SUMMARY SUIT NO.274 OF 2021
Mr. Rajesh Singh,
Age 45 years,
Adult, Indian Inhabitant, of Mumbai,
having office at 16, Manu mansion,
Ground Floor, Shahid Bhagat Singh Marg,
Opp. Old Custom House, Fort,
Mumbai – 400 001.
...Plaintiff.
Versus
1. M/s. Syncline Films Pvt. Ltd.,
A Company registered under the
Companies Act, 1956, having registered office
at III-6/6C, 2nd floor, Gopinath Market,
Delhi Cantonment,
New Delhi – 110010.
2. Mr. Kameswar Yedavilli Rao
Age not known, Adult,
Indian Inhabitant of Delhi, the Director
-- 1 of 7 --
Sum.Suit 274 of 2021 .. J/2 .. Judgment
of Syncline Films Pvt. Ltd., Residing at
Flat No.139, Prasad Nagar,
New Delhi 110005.
3. Mr. Sanjeev Sharma,
Age not known, Adult,
Indian Inhabitant of Delhi, the Director
of Syncline Films Pvt. Ltd., Residing at
C-39 Upper Ground floor, Kirti Nagar, Ramesh Nagar,
New Delhi - 110015.
4. Mr. Jaj Padmakaran
Age not known, Adult,
Indian Inhabitant of Delhi, the Director
of Syncline Films Pvt. Ltd., Residing at
101, Ganapathy Apartments, Plot No.6,
Sector No.9, Dwarka Raj Nagar-II,
Delhi -110077.
5. Jaken Patel
Age not known, Adult,
Indian Inhabitant of Delhi, the Senior Manager
(Operation) of Syncline Films Pvt. Ltd.,
Having Mumbai Office at Unit No.804,
Ijmima Commercial Complex,
Behind Goregaon Sports Club, Near Infinity Mall,
Off link road, Malad (West),
Mumbai – 400 064.
...Defendants.
Appearances:
Adv. Ashish Singh For the plaintiff
Ex-parte For defendants.
CORAM : HIS HONOUR JUDGE
N. B. LAVTE
(C.R.No.83)
DATED: 6th May, 2025
-- 2 of 7 --
Sum.Suit 274 of 2021 .. J/3 .. Judgment
J U D G M E N T
This is a Summary Suit under Order XXXVII of the Code of
Civil Procedure for recovery of professional fees of an amount of
Rs.1,80,000/- alongwith 18% p.a.
2. The brief facts of the plaintiffs case is that :
He is a practicing Advocate of High Court. The defendant
No.1 is a Private Limited Company, of which defendant Nos.2 to 4 are
the Directors and defendant No.5 is the Senior Manager. In the month
of June-July, 2017, defendant No.5 approached plaintiff and sought his
legal services in Criminal Complaint No.23319 of 2016. After discussion
the professional fees was fixed of Rs.1,00,000/-. The defendants also
agreed to pay Rs.5,000/- per appearance excluding miscellaneous and
out of pocket expenses. He appeared and got the bailable warrant
canceled by filing an application. He appeared and filed an application
for Compounding offences and for discharge and also drafted the board
resolution and authority letter. He also appeared on 05.07.2018
wherein the defendant No.1 pleaded guilty and the matter was finally
disposed of. Thereafter, claimed professional fees of Rs.1,80,000/-, but
defendants failed to pay the same. He issued legal notice on
11.02.2019, inspite of it he did not receive the amount. Hence, the suit.
3. The defendants were duly served vide service affidavit Exh.2,
Exh.3 and Exh.6. However, they failed to appear hence, the suit
proceeded Ex-parte against them.
-- 3 of 7 --
Sum.Suit 274 of 2021 .. J/4 .. Judgment
4. In view of the pleadings of the parties, following points
arise for my determination and on which I have given my findings
alongwith reasons as under:
Sr. POINTS FINDINGS
1 Is plaintiff entitled for recovery of an amount of
Rs.1,80,000/- with 18% p.a. from defendants ?
Partly
affirmative.
2 What order and decree ? As per final
order.
REASONS
5. In order to prove the suit claim, plaintiff filed his evidence
affidavit vide (Exh.7) and placed reliance on the following documents
namely, Certified copy of Summons dated 28.09.2016 (Exh.9), Certified
Copy of Vakalatnama filed in the complaint No. 23319 fo 2016 before
Ld. M. M.s 39the Court at Vile parle, Mumbai (Exh.10), Certified Copy
of application for cancellation of warrant against the defendant Nos. 2
to 4 as well as order passed (Exh.11), Certified Copy of Application for
compounding of the offence (Exh.12), Certified copy of say of the
complainant (Exh.13), Certified copy of order (Exh.14), Certified copy
of amended compliant No.3923319/SS/16 (Exh.15), Certified copy of
summons (Exh.16), Email (Exh.17), Certified copy of Authority letter
(Exh.18), Certified true copy plea of the accused and order (Exh.19),
Copy of case status (Exh.20), Email (Exh.21 & 22), Demand Notice
(Exh.23), Memo of professional fees (Exh.24), Postal receipts (Exh.25),
Postal packet -1 (Exh.26), Reminder Notice (Exh.27), Postal receipts
(Exh.28.), Particulars of claim (Exh.29), Affidavit U/s. 63 of Bhartiya
Sakshaya Adhiniyam (Exh.30).
-- 4 of 7 --
Sum.Suit 274 of 2021 .. J/5 .. Judgment
AS TO POINT NO.1.
6. Heard plaintiff in person and gone through the documents
filed on record. According to plaintiff he was appointed by the
defendants in Criminal Complaint No.233 of 2016 wherein he defended
all the defendants in the case and on 05.07.2018 which was finally
disposed of in view of defendant No.1 pleading guilty. However,
defendants failed to pay him the agreed legal fees.
7. The plaintiff filed his evidence affidavit Exh.8, which is
verbatim of the pleadings and in absence of cross-examination, the
same has gone unchallenged. The documents namely copy of
Vakalatnama (Exh.10) reveals plaintiff was engaged to defend the
defendants in the Complaint No.23319 of 2016 pending in the
Metropolitan Magistrate Court No.39, Vile Parle. The further documents
namely an application to cancel the warrant (Exh.11), an application
for compounding the offence (Exh.12) and Certified copies of the
complaint and other documents (Exh.13 to 16) reveals plaintiff being
an Advocate of defendants gave his legal services. The demand notice
Exh.20 alongwith memo of professaional fees (Exh.24) reveals
defendants failed to pay the legal charges.
8. As discussed above as the suit proceeded Ex-parte and the
evidence affidavit and documents filed on record have gone
unchallenged. Therefore, this Court is of the view that defendants
inspite of engaging the plaintiff to defend them, failed to pay his legal
charges. Hence, plaintiff is entitled for recovery of an amount of
Rs.1,80,000/-. As regards the rate of interest I am of the view that as it
was not commercial transaction, hence interest of 6% p.a from the date
-- 5 of 7 --
Sum.Suit 274 of 2021 .. J/6 .. Judgment
of issuance of the legal notice till realization would be appropriate rate
of interest. Hence point No.1 is answered partly in the affirmative.
AS TO ISSUE NO.2.
9. In view of my finding to point No.1, the suit is liable to be
partly decreed with costs and plaintiff is entitled for recover an amount
of Rs.1,80,000/- with interest @ 6% p.a from the demand notice dated
11.02.2019 till its realization. In the result, I proceed to pass the
following order:
ORDER
1. The Summary Suit No.274 of 2021 is partly decreed with costs.
2. The defendants are directed to pay to plaintiff an amount of
Rs.1,80,000/- with 6% p.a from the demand notice dated
11.02.2019 till its realization.
3 The decree be drawn up accordingly.
4. The R & P be sent to Record Department.
( N. B. Lavte )
Judge, (C.R.No.83)
Dt.:06-05-2025 City Civil Court, Mazgaon,
MUMBAI MUMBAI
Dictated on : 06-05-2025
Transcribed on : 08-05-2025
checked on : 19-05-2025
Signed on : 19-05-2025 (N. B. Lavte)
Judge, (C.R.No.83)
City Civil Court, Mazgaon,
MUMBAI
-- 6 of 7 --
Sum.Suit 274 of 2021 .. J/7 .. Judgment
“CERTIFIED TOBE TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF THE ORIGINAL
SIGNED JUDGMENT/ORDER”
19.05.2025 at 04.25 p.m.
UPLOAD DATE AND TIME (VARSHA U. PAWAR)
NAME OF STENOGRAPHER
Name of the Judge H.H.J.Shri. N. B. Lavte
(COURT ROOM NO.83)
Date of pronouncement of
judgment/order
06.05.2025
Judgment/order signed by P.O. on 19.05.2025
Judgment/order uploaded on
due to non working of cis
19.05.2025
-- 7 of 7 --