Full Order Text
Final Order 1 · 18 Jul 2022 · CNR MHCC010030252020
Order Details: Copy of Judgment Pdf Text: 1 MHCC010030252020 Lodged on 09/03/2020 Registered on 02/02/2021 Decided on 18/07/2022 Duration 2Y : 4 M : 9D EXHIBIT-08 IN THE COURT OF CITY CIVIL COURT AT GREATER BOMBAY SUMMARY SUIT NO. 57 OF 2021 Seema Nandlal Talreja, Adlt, Indian Inhabitant of Bombay, aged 58 years, carrying on business at 34, Dariya Mahal-A, 80, Nepeansea Road, Mumbai-400 006. ...Plaintiff Versus 1. XPRO IT INNOVATIONS PVT.LTD . Ltd. a company registered under the companies Act, 1956 carrying on business at Gala No.116, 1st Floor, Niraj Ind. Estate, Opp. Sun Pharma, Paper Box Lane, off Mahakali Caves Road, Andheri(E), Mumbai-400 093. And at 901, Sugee Heights, Dwarkesh Nagar, Nahur Road, Opp. St.Pius School, Mulund (W), Mumbai-400 080. 2. Jatin Vinaykumar Shah, Adult, Indian Inhabiant of Bombay, -- 1 of 7 -- 2 Exparte Judg.in Sum SU No.57/2021 age not known residing and carrying on business at 901, Sugee Heights, Dwarkesh Nagar, Nahur Road, Opp. St.Pius School, Mulund (W), Mumbai- 400 080. 3. Bhavini Jatin Shah, Adult, Indian Inhabiant of Bombay, age not known residing and carrying on business at 901, Sugee Heights, Dwarkesh Nagar, Nahur Road, Opp. St.Pius School, Mulund (W), Mumbai- 400 080. 4. Pradeepkumar Chandrashekhar Pandey Adult, Indian Inhabitant of Bombay, age not known residing and carrying on business at Building No.13, CR No.2, Nagari Nivara Parishad, Plot No.5, Goegaon (East), Mumbai-400 065. And also carrying on busienss at the addess of Defendant No.1. ...Defendants Appearance : Adv. Ms. Kavita Lalwani for plaintiff. None for defendant (Exparte). CORAM : HHJ DR. S. D. TAWSHIKAR C. R. NO. : 61 DATE : 18/07/2022 Judgment By way of present Summary Suit, plaintiff prays that the -- 2 of 7 -- 3 Exparte Judg.in Sum SU No.57/2021 decree against the defendants for an amount of Rs.1,06,452/- along with further interest at the rate of 18% p.a. on the principal amount of Rs.83,330/-. Plaintiff’s case- 2. Plaintiff contends that an amount of Rs.2 Lakh was advanced by the plaintiff to the defendants by cheque dated 23/11/2017. Defendants against the said payment issued Demand Bill of Exchange of Rs. 2 lakh on the same date. Defendant Nos.2, 3 and 4 signed the said Bill of Exchange on behalf of defendant No.1. 3. The plaintiff presented the Demand Bill of Exchange on 30/07/2018, however defendant No.1 dishonoured the same and as such an amount of Rs.83,330/-. is still balance. Plaintiff further contends that an amount was demanded by issuing demand notice through an advocate on 04/12/2019. In spite of the said notice, defendants did not pay the amount and therefore the present suit is filed. 4. Plaintiff contends that Rs.1,16,670/- Lakh was returned by the defendants. An amount of Rs.83,330/- is the outstanding. It is further contended that for the payment of the said outstanding amount, defendant No.3 had issued a cheque dated 05/08/2019 of Rs.83,330/-. However, the said cheque was dishonoured with a remark “ Funds Insufficient”. 5. Defendants were duly served with the writ of summons. However, they did not appear before this Court and as such suit proceeded exparte against them. 6. In support of claim, plaintiff filed her affidavit of claim at -- 3 of 7 -- 4 Exparte Judg.in Sum SU No.57/2021 Exhibit-3 and reiterated her claim by recovery of Rs.83,330/- along with interest at the rate of 18% p.a. Plaintiff has filed and relied upon following documents. Sr. No. Exhibit No. Particulars 1 Exh.5 Bill of Exchange dated 23/11/2017. 2 Exh.6 Packed envelope of demand notice sent to the Defendant No.1 returned unserved. 3 Exh.7 Packed envelope of demand notice sent to the Defendant No.1 returned unserved. 7. So as to decide the present suit, following points arise for my consideration. I have recorded my findings for the reasons, as under :- Sr. No. Points Findings 1. Whether plaintiff is entitled to recover an amount of Rs.1,28,494/- from defendants? If yes, at what rate interest? Plaintiff is entitled to recover an amount of Rs.83,330/- from the defendants along with interest at the rate of 09% p.a. from 30/07/2018 till its full realization 2. What order and decree? Suit is partly decreed as per final order. REASONS As to Point No. 1- 8. This being a suit for recovery of an amount, it is imperative to examine whether the plaintiff has placed on record the requisite -- 4 of 7 -- 5 Exparte Judg.in Sum SU No.57/2021 evidence to prove her entitlement. Plaintiff contends on oath that an amount of Rs.2, lakh were lent to the defendants and against that the Demand Promissory Note was issued. Further contention of the plaintiff is that out of 2 lakhs an amount of Rs.1,16,670/- was paid and amount of Rs.83,330/- is the outstanding. The oral submission get boosted by way of original Demand Bill of Exchange as well as demand notice. Issuance of bill of exchange by defendants, itself shows the liability of defendants to pay the amount mentioned in the bill of exchange. There is no contra evidence to repell the contentions of the plaintiff. 9. In spite of service of summons defendants did not turn up to the Court and therefore the suit was proceed exparte. Therefore contentions of the plaintiff have gone unchallenged. Therefore, I find no reason to discard her claim. Hence, suit is liable to be decreed. 10. Plaintiff has claimed interest at the rate of 18%p.a. from 31/07/2018. Admittedly, the said transaction does not seems to be a commercial transaction. Claim of the plaintiff is at higher rate. Nonetheless fact remains that an amount is outstanding since dishonured of Bill of Exchange on 31/07/2018. Admittedly, the suit has also filed after lapse of almost two and half years. Considering the current rate of fixed deposit of nationalized bank, I find that the interest at the rate of 9% p.a. would be just and proper. Hence, the order. ORDER A. Suit is partly decreed. B. The Defendants do pay jointly and severally Rs.83,330/- (Rupees Eighty Three Thousand Three Hundred Thirty Only) to the Plaintiff along with interest at the rate of 9% p.a. from 31/07/2018 till its realization. C. Court Fees be refunded as per rules. -- 5 of 7 -- 6 Exparte Judg.in Sum SU No.57/2021 D. Decree be drawn up accordingly. Date- 18/07/2022. (Dr. S. D. Tawshikar) Judge, City Civil Court, Gr. Mumbai. Court Room No.61 Dictated on : 18/07/2022 Transcribed on : 19/07/2022 Signed on : 21/07/2022 -- 6 of 7 -- 7 Exparte Judg.in Sum SU No.57/2021 “CERTIFIED TO BE TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF THE ORIGINAL SIGNED JUDGMENT/ORDER” UPLOAD DATE AND TIME NAME OF STENOGRAPHER 22/07/2022 Mrs. Vidya V. Malgaonkar Name of the Judge (with Court Room No.) Dr. S.D. Tawshikar C.R. No.61 Date of Pronouncement of JUDGMENT/ ORDER 18/07/2022 JUDGMENT/ORDER signed by P. O. on 21/07/2022 JUDGMENT/ORDER uploaded on 22/07/2022 -- 7 of 7 --
