Final Order 1

Order Details: Other
Pdf Text: 1 S/J No. 233/18 in Summary Suit No.269/18
IN THE BOMBAY CITY CIVIL COURT AT BOMBAY
SUMMONS FOR JUDGMENT No.233 of 2018
In
SUMMARY SUIT NO.269 OF 2018
(CNR NO. MH CC010100032018)
Nandlal Kanayalal Talreja
Age : 63 years, The Karta & Manager,
of Nandlal K. Talreja (HUF)
carrying on Business at 34,
Dariya Mahal, A80,
Nepeansea Road
Mumbai400 006. ….Plaintiff
V/s.
1. RSG INFOTECH (P) LTD.
A Company registered under the
Companies Act, 1956, carrying on business
At 1st Floor, Maina Gul Building,
Ceaser Road, Amboli, Andheri (West),
Mumbai400 058.
2. Jyoti Achary
Age : Adult, Indian inhabitant,
R/at : A403, Orchid Valley of Flowers,
Thakur Village, Kandivali (East),
Mumbai400 101.
3. Anil Achary
Age : Adult, Indian inhabitant,
R/at : A403, Orchid Valley of Flowers,
Thakur Village, Kandivali (East),
Mumbai400 101.
(Defendants Nos. 2 and 3 carry on business
at the address of the Defendant No. 1 .... Defendants
-- 1 of 6 --
2 S/J No. 233/18 in Summary Suit No.269/18
Appearance:
Ms. Kavita S. Lalwani, Advocate for the Plaintiff.
None for defendants.
CORAM : HER HONOUR JUDGE
JAYSHRI R. PULATE
Adhoc Judge
City Civil Court,
Gr. Bombay
(C.R.NO.40)
DATE : 16 th October, 2019.
ORDER
1. The plaintiff has taken out this summons for judgment for
recovery of Rs.1,09,812/ alongwith interest at the rate of 18% per
annum.
2. It is the case of plaintiffs that he is carrying on business and
defendant No.1 is a Company registered under the Indian Companies
Act, 1956. The defendant Nos. 2 and 3 are carrying on business at the
address of defendant No.1. On 16.12.2015, defendant No.1 drew a
demand for Bill of Exchange on defendant Nos.2 and 3 for valuable
consideration in favour of plaintiff for the sum of Rs.1,75,000/. The
said demand Bill of Exchange was accepted by the defendant Nos.2 and 3
for payment. The plaintiff has advanced the sum of Rs.1,75,000/ to the
defendants through cheque dated 16.12.2015 bearing No.024892 of
Rs.1,75,000/ in favour of the defendants and upon receipt of the same
defendants have executed Bill of Exchange dated 16.12.2015.
3. It is the contention of the plaintiff that on 18.01.2016, 18.02.2016,
18.03.2016 and 18.04.2016 through cheques the defendants have paid
-- 2 of 6 --
3 S/J No. 233/18 in Summary Suit No.269/18
the amount of Rs.21,875/ each. Thereafter, on 29.08.2016, the
plaintiff presented the Bill of Exchange for the balance sum of
Rs.87,500/ to defendant Nos. 2 and 3, and then to defendant No. 1 for
payment but all the defendants dishonoured the said Bill of Exchange by
nonpayment. On 08.11.2017, the defendants issued a cheque of
Rs.87,500/ in favour of plaintiff drawn on Union Bank of India, Versova,
Mumbai 400 058. However, the said cheque was dishonoured when
presented by the plaintiff for encashment, for the reason “Funds
Insufficient”.
4. Eventually on 17.11.2017, the plaintiff issued demand notice to
the defendants calling upon them for balance payment of Rs.87,500/
alongwith interest @ 18% p.a.. Since the defendants failed to comply
the notice, the suit is filed and it is prayed that the summons for
judgment be made absolute.
5. In spite of service of summons for judgment, defendants failed to
appear and apply for leave to defend the suit. Therefore, summons for
judgment proceeded without reply of defendant Nos. 1 to 3.
6. I have heard the submissions advanced by the Ld. Advocate for the
plaintiff. The original Bill of Exchange dated 16.12.2015 is filed on
record. The recitals of the said Bill of Exchange reflects that on behalf of
defendant Nos.1, defendant Nos.2 and 3 accepted to pay Rs.1,75,000/
to plaintiff. It is evident from the record that the plaintiff received an
amount of Rs.87,500/ out of Rs.1,75,000/. The recitals of demand
notice dated 17.11.2017 also reflects that the plaintiff has demanded
Rs.87,500/ from the defendants with interest @ of 18% p.a.. As the
-- 3 of 6 --
4 S/J No. 233/18 in Summary Suit No.269/18
defendants failed to apply for leave to defend the suit, the contentions
raised by the plaintiff coupled with the original documents adduced on
record shows that the defendants are in due of Rs.87,500/ with further
interest on the same @ 18% p.a. from the date of filing of suit till its
realization. Accordingly, the summons for judgment is required to be
made absolute in terms of prayer of plaintiff. Resultantly, I pass the
following order :
ORDER
1. Summons for judgment No. 233 of 2018 is made absolute and
suit is decreed with costs.
2. Defendants are directed to pay the plaintiff sum of Rs.87,500/
(Rs. Eighty Seven Thousand Five Hundred Only), alongwith
further interest on the same @ 18% per annum from the date of
filing of the suit till the realization of decretal amount.
3. Decree be drawn up accordingly.
4. Court fee, if any, be refunded as per rules.
(Jayshri R. Pulate)
Adhoc Judge
City Civil Court,
Gr. Bombay
Date : 16/10/2019
Dictated on : 16.10.2019
Transcribed on : 17.10.2019
Signed on : 17.10.2019
-- 4 of 6 --
5 S/J No. 233/18 in Summary Suit No.269/18
“CERTIFIED TO BE TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF THE ORIGINAL
SIGNED ORDER.”
UPLOAD DATE TIME STENOGRAPHER NAME
23.10.2019 11.40 a.m. Ms. Ujwala J. Bhagat
Name of the Judge H.H.J. Jayshri R. Pulate.
Adhoc Judge.
(Court Room No.40)
Date of pronouncement of Order 16.10.2019
Order signed by P.O. on 17.10.2019
Order uploaded on 23.10.2019
-- 5 of 6 --
6 S/J No. 233/18 in Summary Suit No.269/18
-- 6 of 6 --