Final Order 2

Order Details: Other
Pdf Text: Summons for Judgment No. 32/2020 in 1 Order.
Sum.Suit No. 13/19.
MHCC010018912020
Presented on : 13-02-2020
Registered on : 13-02-2020
Decided on : 02-12-2023
Duration : 3 years, 9 months, 19 days
IN THE BOMBAY CITY CIVIL COURT AT BOMBAY.
SUMMONS FOR JUDGMENT NO. 32 OF 2020
IN
SUMMARY SUIT NO. 13 OF 2019
JETHMAL MANECKCHAND SANGHVI [HUF] )
Carrying on business through its Karta Shri )
Jethmal Maneckchand Sanghvi in the name )
And style and as Proprietor of SWASTIK )
TRADING CO., at Second Floor, 1/3 )
432, Kalbadevi Road, Mumbai 400 002 )...Plaintiffs
Versus
Messrs NEEV REALTORS a firm )
Carrying on business at 101, Sunder )
Apartments, Nesbit Road, Mazgaon )
Mumbai 400010 )...Defendants
Smt. Kalpana Shah, Advocate for the plaintiffs.
Smt. Minal Parab, Advocate for the defendants.
CORAM : HIS HONOUR JUDGE SHRI S.D.KULKARNI.
(COURT ROOM NO.66).
DATE : 2nd DECEMBER, 2023.
-- 1 of 6 --
Summons for Judgment No. 32/2020 in 2 Order.
Sum.Suit No. 13/19.
ORDER
1. The plaintiff has filed the suit for recovery of
Rs.29,95,000/- alongwith interest on Rs.25,00,000/- at the rate of 12%
p.a. with cost of the suit.
2. It is case of the plaintiff that he has deposited a sum of
Rs.25,00,000/- by a cheque bearing No. 783748 dated 28/07/2014
drawn on Oriental Bank of Commerce, Silk Bazar, Mumbai in favour of
defendant. Said cheque was duly received by defendant and encashed
through their banker on or about 30/07/2014. The defendants have
agreed to repay the said amount of Rs.25,00,000/- with interest at the
rate of 12% p.a. The defendant made payment of interest at the agreed
rate of 12% p.a. after deducting Tax at Source for the period till
31/03/2017. The defendant forwarded the confirmation of account
dated 01/04/2015 for the accounting year from 01/04/2014 to
31/03/2015 by admitting payment of interest to the plaintiff at the rate
of 12% p.a. till 31/03/2015 and sum of Rs.25,00,000/- remained due
and payable by the defendants to the plaintiff as on 31/03/2015. The
defendant again forwarded the confirmation of account dated
01/04/2016 for the accounting year from 01/04/2015 to 31/03/2016
by admitting payment of interest to the plaintiff at the rate of 12% p.a.
till 31/03/2015 and sum of Rs.25,00,000/- remained due and payable
by the defendants to the plaintiff as on 31/03/2016. The defendant
again forwarded the confirmation of account dated 01/04/2017 for the
accounting year from 01/04/2016 to 31/03/2017 by admitting
payment of interest to the plaintiff at the rate of 12% p.a. till
31/03/2017 and sum of Rs.25,00,000/- remained due and payable by
the defendants to the plaintiff as on 31/03/2017.
-- 2 of 6 --
Summons for Judgment No. 32/2020 in 3 Order.
Sum.Suit No. 13/19.
3. It is further alleged by plaintiff that inpsite of repeated
demand and request, the defendant failed and neglected to pay the said
dues. The plaintiff issued notice through advocate on 28/09/2018 and
called upon defendant to make the payment of principal sum and
interest thereon at the rate of 12% p.a. from 01/04/2017. Thus,
plaintiff filed present suit for directing defendant to pay sum of
Rs.29,95,000/- and interest on Rs.25,00,000/- at the rate of 12% p.a.
till final realization and cost of suit.
4. On the other hand, defendant by filing affidavit in reply
disputed the payment of Rs.25,00,000/- by plaintiff to the defendant.
The defendant also denied that he agreed to repay the amount
alongwith interest at the rate of 12% p.a. The defendant had never
issued any confirmation of account to the plaintiff. The contention of
defendant that plaintiff has filed the suit in order to grab amount from
him. Therefore, prayed for leave to defend unconditionally by
dismissing summons for judgment.
5. Perused summons for judgment, affidavit in reply filed by
the defendant. Therefore following points arose for my determination
with my findings thereon for the reasons enumerated below :
SR.NO. POINTS FINDINGS
1. Whether plaintiff is entitled for the
summons for judgment ?
In the Affirmative.
2. Whether the defendants have just and
valid ground to grant leave to defend ?
In the Negative.
3. What order ? As per final order.
-- 3 of 6 --
Summons for Judgment No. 32/2020 in 4 Order.
Sum.Suit No. 13/19.
REASONS
AS TO POINTS NO.1 AND 2 :-
6. The contention of the plaintiff that they have deposited the
sum of Rs.25,00,000/- by cheque in the account of defendant and the
defendant have also encashed the said amount through their bankers.
Further the contention of the plaintiff that the defendant has forwarded
letter of confirmation of account by contending that sum of
Rs.25,00,000/- alongwith interest at the rate of 12% p.a. is remains due
and payable by defendant to plaintiff. In support of the above
contention, the plaintiff has filed on record the copy of confirmation of
account issued by the defendant company in favour of plaintiff. The
plaintiff has filed on record notice issued by the plaintiff to defendant.
The contention of the plaintiff that said notice though received by
defendant failed to file reply as well as sum payable to the plaintiff. All
above documents sufficiently shows that sum of Rs.25,00,000/- is
remains due and payable by defendant to plaintiff alongwith agreed
rate of interest 12% p.a.
7. The defendant have taken stand of total denial, even
defendant denied that plaintiff advanced it loan of Rs.25,00,000/-, but
above contention of defendant falsify by its confirmation of account
letter issued by defendant. Therefore, in my opinion, the defence taken
by the defendant is not acceptable. The defendants do not have just and
valid ground to grant leave to defend. The plaintiff is entitled to recover
the cheque amount alongwith accrued interest from the defendants.
Therefore, I answer points no.1 and 2 accordingly. Hence, I pass
following order :
-- 4 of 6 --
Summons for Judgment No. 32/2020 in 5 Order.
Sum.Suit No. 13/19.
- ORDER -
1. Summons for Judgment No. 32/2020 is made absolute.
2. Summary Suit No. 13/2019 is decreed with cost.
3. The defendants are directed to pay sum of Rs.29,95,000/-
alongwith interest on Rs.25,00,000/- at the rate of 12% p.a. to
the plaintiff from the date of the filing of the suit till its
realization within three months from the date of decree.
4. The plaintiff is entitled for refund of court fee as per rules.
5. Decree be drawn up accordingly.
6. Summons for Judgment No. 32/2020 is disposed off accordingly.
(S.D.KULKARNI)
Judge,
City Civil Court,
(Court Room No.66)
Date : 02/12/2023. Mumbai.
1. Dictated online on : 02/12/2023.
2. Placed for correction on : 02/12/2023.
3. Checked on : 04/12/2023.
4. Correction carried on : 04/12/2023.
5. Signed on : 04/12/2023.
6. Delivered to Certified :
Copy Section on
“CERTIFIED TO BE TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF THE ORIGINAL
-- 5 of 6 --
Summons for Judgment No. 32/2020 in 6 Order.
Sum.Suit No. 13/19.
SIGNED JUDGMENT/ORDER”
UPLOAD DATE AND TIME NAME OF STENOGRAPHER
05/12/2023. 5.45 p.m. Miss M.A.Kulkarni.
Name of the Judge (with Court Room no.) HHJ Shri S.D.Kulkarni.
(Court Room No.66).
Date of Pronouncement of Judgment/Order 02/12/2023.
Judgment/Order signed by P.O. on 04/12/2023.
Judgment/Order uploaded on 05/12/2023.
-- 6 of 6 --