Final Order 2

Order Details: Copy of Judgment
Pdf Text: CS No. 574 /2022
Wadia Vs. Milesahead
Judgment 1 of 6
MHCC010033182020 Lodged on : 16.03.2020
Admitted on : 25.08.2022
Decided on : 03.07.2026
Duration : 06 Y : 03 M : 17 D
Exhibit : 20
IN THE BOMBAY CITY CIVIL COURT AT MAZGAON
COMMERCIAL SUIT NO.574 OF 2022
Wadia Enterprises
Through proprietor Mr. Kersasp R. Wadia, Aged 57
years, Add : B-201, Panthaky Baug, M V Road,
Andheri East, Mumbai 400 069.
Plaintiff
VERSUS
Milesahead Tech Private Limited
Mr. Sampat Kumar, Add : Office No. 203, Ecstasy
Business Park, JSD Road, Mulund West, Mumbai 400
080. Defendant
Appearance :
Adv. Anil Gaikwad : For Plaintiff.
Adv. Anil Kharatmol : For Defendant
CORAM : N. B. LAVTE, (C.R.No.31)
DATE : 03.07.2026
***************************************************************
JUDGMENT
(Delivered on this 3rd day of July, 2026)
This Commercial Suit is filed for recovery of Rs.7,30,946/- with
14% p.a. The suit is filed through authorized representative Mr. Kersasp
R. Wadia.
-- 1 of 6 --
CS No. 574 /2022
Wadia Vs. Milesahead
Judgment 2 of 6
In short, it is the case of plaintiff that:
2. The Milesahead Tech Pvt. Ltd. appointed Wadia Enterprises as
distributor vide “Distributor Agreement” Dt.05.02.2017. The plaintiff
purchased initial stock of Jenext Jobcards & Jenext Employer Cards
worth Rs.3,11,000/- for sale in the assigned area. The defendant agreed
to recruit and appoint Sales Executive by bearing the monthly salary
and expenditure and further agreed to give compensation to plaintiff in
the form of FOC (Free of Cost) Cards, of value of Rs.15,000/- p.m. In
view of the said assurance, the plaintiff paid monthly salary of
Rs.15,000/- p.m. of the Sales Executive for 20 months from February
2017 to October 2018 amounting to Rs.3,00,000/-.
3. It is further case of the plaintiff that defendant agreed to give
FOC Cards for 20 months. Inspite of sincerity and punctuality, the
plaintiff could not sell the cards, therefore, the business was wind up.
As per clause VII of the Agreement, the plaintiff on 01.08.2018
submitted Termination Letter to defendant by giving 30 days notice. As
per Clause VIII, the plaintiff immediately returned all operating
manuals, computer programs and unsold job and employer cards to
defendant which was duly acknowledged vide acknowledgment
Dt.01.09.2018. As per clause VIII(B) upon termination the plaintiff will
entitle to receive full and final settlement payment of returned, unsold
job and employer cards, however defendant denied the settlement
amount.
4. As per full and final settlement, an amount of Rs.5,14,751/-
with 24% p.a and Rs.50,000/- towards conveyance and legal fees. On
06.11.2018, legal notice was issued calling upon the defendant to pay
the settlement amount. Again on 26.05.2019, reminder legal notice was
-- 2 of 6 --
CS No. 574 /2022
Wadia Vs. Milesahead
Judgment 3 of 6
sent. By reply, defendant raised false and frivolous contention and failed
to pay the amount. Hence, suit.
5. Pursuant to the issuance of writ of summons, defendant
appeared through Adv. Anil Kharatmol and filed Vakalatnama vide
Exh.4. The order Dt.16.09.2025 passed below Exh.5 reveals the
application filed by plaintiff to pass no written statement order was
allowed and suit was directed to proceed without written statement.
Thus, there is no written statement of defendant on record.
6. From the pleadings, following points arise for my
consideration and determination to which I have given my findings
alongwith reasons as under:
Sr. Points Findings
1. Is plaintiff entitled for recovery of an amount of Rs.
7,30,946/- with 14% p.a from defendant?
Affirmative.
2. What order and decree ? As per final
order.
REASONS
7. In order to substantiate its claim, plaintiff filed evidence
affidavit of its authorized representative namely Mr. Kersasp R. Wadia
vide Exh.8 and also placed reliance on following documents namely
Certificate u/s.65-B of Indian Evidence Act (Exh.10), Distributor
Agreement (Exh.11), Statement of Account and payment proofs
(Exh.12), Emails approving manpower costs (Exh.13), Termination
letter (Exh.14), Acknowledgment of defendant (Exh.15) and Legal
Notice (Exh.16). Plaintiff filed evidence closure pursis vide Exh.17.
-- 3 of 6 --
CS No. 574 /2022
Wadia Vs. Milesahead
Judgment 4 of 6
AS TO POINT NO.1 :
8. Heard Adv. Anil Gaikwad for plaintiff and gone through the
written notes of arguments Exh.18. From the oral argument advanced
and the written notes of arguments coupled with the Distributor
Agreement (Exh.11) it is not disputed that plaintiff and defendant had
entered into a Distributor Agreement. The case of the plaintiff is that as
per clause VII provides for termination and clause VIII provides for
rights and duties of parties upon expiration or termination. Inspite of
termination by proper procedure, the defendant failed to make payment
of unsold job and employer cards. The clause VIII (B) is material. For
ready reference, it is reproduced :
B. Upon severance by mutual consent, MILESAHEAD will take
stock returns, if any, of unsold, intact units of JENEXT CARDS
without any unsealing of the bundle and without any physical
damages and refund the amount pertaining to the returned cards
after deducting the service taxes on applicable at the time of
return on the MRP value of each card.
9. The plaintiff filed his evidence affidavit and reiterated the
contents of the plaint in verbatim. As the defendant and their Advocate
failed to conduct the cross examination, the right of cross examination
was forfeited. Thus, in absence of cross examination, the evidence has
gone unchallenged. As regards the recovery of amount, the plaintiff has
filed on record Acknowledgment (Exh.15), perusal of the same reveals
it is issued by the defendant itself signed by authorized signatory having
seal. Thus, acknowledgment itself proves the liability of Rs.9,07,989/-
which the plaintiff proved the outstanding liability.
10. In view of the above discussion, suit deserves to be decreed
with cost. As regards the rate of interest, plaintiff claimed 14% p.a
-- 4 of 6 --
CS No. 574 /2022
Wadia Vs. Milesahead
Judgment 5 of 6
which is reasonable rate of interest. Hence, plaintiff is entitled to
recover from defendant an amount of Rs.7,30,946/- with 14% p.a on
principal amount of Rs.5,14,751/- from the date of filing of the suit till
realization. In the result, I proceed to pass following order.
ORDER
1. The Commercial Suit No.574 of 2022 is decreed with costs.
2. The defendant is directed to pay to plaintiff an amount of
Rs.7,30,946/- (Rs. Seven Lakhs Thirty Thousand Nine Hundred
and Forty Six Only) with 14% p.a on principal amount of
Rs.5,14,751/- from the date of filing of the suit till realization.
3. The decree be drawn up accordingly.
4. The R & P be sent to Record Department.
( N. B. Lavte )
Judge, (C.R.No.31)
Dt.: 03.07.2026 City Civil Court, Mazgaon,
MUMBAI
-- 5 of 6 --
CS No. 574 /2022
Wadia Vs. Milesahead
Judgment 6 of 6
CERTIFIED TO BE TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF THE ORIGINAL
SIGNED JUDGMENT/ORDER”
UPLOAD DATE TIME NAME OF STENOGRAPHER
03.07.2026 5.45 p.m. Prachi Y. Potdar
Stenographer - Grade I
Name of the Judge HHJ Shri. N. B. Lavte
(C.R.NO. 31)
Date of Pronouncement of
Judgment/Order.
03.07.2026
Judgment/order signed by P.O on 03.07.2026
Judgment/order uploaded on 03.07.2026
-- 6 of 6 --