Full Order Text
Final Order 1 · 15 Nov 2018 · CNR MHCC010016412018
Order Details: Ex-parte Judgement Pdf Text: Presented on 31.01.2018 Registered on 16.03.2018 Decided on 15.11.2018 Duration Yrs. M. Days 08 CNR No. EXH. IN THE BOMBAY CITY CIVIL COURT AT BOMBAY SUMMARY SUIT NO.344 OF 2018 M/s. Rushabh Novelty a Proprietary concern, Through its proprietor Mr.Damji Vijpar Savla, having their address at Shop No.2, Akhalwaya Building, 118, Sarang Street, Mumbai400 003. ...Plaintiff V/s. M/s. Hill Top Gift Also a proprietary concern having their address at : 14, 1st floor, Sandhu Sapet, P.S. Lane Cross, (Behind Vijaylakshmi Talkies) Chickpet, Bangalore560053 ...Defendant Appearances: Ld. Adv Ms.Madhuri Maisheri for plaintiff. None for defendant. Hence, suit proceeded exparte against defendant. CORAM : HIS HONOUR JUDGE SHRI ABHIJEET A. NANDGAONKAR (C.R.No.20) DATED : 15th November,2018 MHCC01-001641-2018 -- 1 of 5 -- .. j/2 .. Summary Suit No.344/2018 J U D G M E N T (Exparte) This is a suit for Rs.10,01,762/ with interest. 2. In short, plaintiff came with a case that, plaintiff is a proprietary concern carrying on their busines of school and stationary at the address mentioned in the title clause. Defendant is also a proprietary concern having address at the address mentioned in the title clause. 3. Plaintiff submitted that, in the course of business defendant approacehd plaintiff and requested them to supply various items of school and office stationary. The said goods were duly accepted by defendant without any dispute. For which plaintiff issued invoices of Rs.9,93,794/, which were duly accepted by defendant and agreed to make payment within 45 days. In spite of agreed defendant has not made payment of invoices. Therefore, plaintiff on several occasions requested defendant to make playment. 4. Plaintiff submitted that, within stipulated time defendants was also required to 'C' form for supply of goods. But defendant has faield and neglected to supply 'C' form. Therefore, defendant is liable to pay penality to the authorities concerned. After considerable time when defendant did not make payment of invoices, plaintiff issued demand notice dt.13.10.2017 called upon defemdant to pay the amount of invoices. In spite service of notice defendant failed to complay the said notice. Therefor, at last, plaintiff approached to this Court for recovery of outstanding amount due againt defendant by filing this suit -- 2 of 5 -- .. j/3 .. Summary Suit No.344/2018 5. Writ of summons issued against defendant. Plaintiff filed service affidavit at Exh.5. In spite of service defendant failed to appear before the Court. Therefore, suit proceeded exparte against defendant. 6. To substantiate its claim plaintiff tendered claim affidavit at Exh.6 and list of documents at Exh.7. Plaintiff proved the documents viz Invoices issued by the plff to the defts alongwith consignment receipts (Exh.8), copy of legal notice dt. 13/10/2017 issued by the plaintiff through their Advocate alongwith its acknowledgement receipts (Exh.9) and particulars of claim (Exh.10). 7. Heard learned Advocate for plaintiff. Perused the record and submissions. 8. No doubt, on perusal of invoices and consignments notes it is crystal clear that, plaintiff had supplied the goods as per request of defendant. Defendant received the said goods as well as invoices without any demur. Therefore, defendant is liable to pay the amount as per invoices for the goods received by them. But defendant failed to make the payment of goods. Even necessary compliance of submissions of 'C' Form for the goods received is not complied by defendant. Therefore, it is clearly established that, defendant failed to comply their legal liability. 9. In spite of service of writ of summons defendant did not appear to rebut the claim of plaintiff. Therefore, claim affidavit of plaintiff remains unchallenged and unrebutted. Hence, I have 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. -- 3 of 5 -- .. j/4 .. Summary Suit No.344/2018 10. In spite of repeated requests and demand defendanf failed to pay the amount due and payable, which forced plaitniff to approach this Court for recovery amount. Therefore, costs of this suit needs to be saddled on defendant. Plaintiff is entitled to recover amount as per agreed rate of interest on the outstanding amount. 11. 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 : O R D E R 1. Suit is decreed with costs. 2. Defendant do pay Rs.11,01,762/ along with interest @ 18 percent per annum on principal amount of Rs.9,93,794/ to plaintiff from the date of filing of this suit till realization of entire decreetal amount. 3. Defendant do bear his 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.:15/11/2018 City Civil Court, Gr. Mumbai Dictated on : 15.11.2018 Transcribed on : 17.11.2018 Signed on : 17.11.2018 kps/ -- 4 of 5 -- .. j/5 .. Summary Suit No.344/2018 “CERTIFIED TOBE TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF THE ORIGINAL SIGNED JUDGMENT/ORDER” 17.11.2018 at 5.22 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 15.11.2018 Judgment/order signed by P.O. on 17.11.2018 Judgment/order uploaded on 17.11.2018 -- 5 of 5 --
