Final Order 1

Order Details: Ex-parte Judgement
Pdf Text: MHCC010054242019 Presented on 03/06/2019
Registered on 10/06/2019
Decided on 05/02/2026
Duration 06Y: 08M: 02D
Exhibit 23
IN THE CITY CIVIL COURT AT MAZGAON, MUMBAI
SUMMARY SUIT NO. 596 of 2019
Shree Auburn Enterprises Pvt. Ltd. ]
a Director of the Company through its ]
Narendra J. Gandhi, having its ]
office at Zaveri Niwas, 2nd Floor, ]
Room No.5, 31 Kennady Bridge, ]
JSS Marg, Mumbai 400004, ]
GST No.24AAACA3825C1ZD ]
Email ID: arplent@yahoo.com ]
Mobile No.9820969090 ]...Plaintiff
V/s. ]
M/s. Himsan Polymer Pvt. Ltd. ]
a Company registered under Companies Act,]
1956, having its office at Gala A.B. 1st Floor ]
Vishal Industries Estate, Near Organic ]
Coating, Ghodbunder Road, Mira Road (E), ]
Dist. Thane-401107. ]
GST No. 27AAHFH7895P1ZA ]
Email ID: infa@himsanpolymer.com ]
Mobile No.9320091509 ]...Defendant
Appearance:-
Ld. Adv. Mr. Hasan Sayed h/f. Adv. R. A. Shaikh for the plaintiff.
Defendant absent.
-- 1 of 8 --
2 SUM SU NO.596/2019
CORAM : HHJ SHRI SANGRAM SHRIHARI SHINDE
C. R. NO. : 81
DATE : 05/02/2026.
ORDER
( Dictated and pronounced in open Court)
01] This suit is filed under Rule 2 of Order XXXVII of Code of
Civil procedure, 1908 (C.P.C.),by the plaintiff for recovery of an
amount of Rs.2,07,870/- (Rs.2,07,869.86 rounded to Rs.2,07,870/- )
including interest and prayed for further interest from the defendant.
Brief facts of plaintiff’s case may be summarized as under :-
02] As per the plaintiff, it is a company incorporated under
the provisions of the Companies Act, 1956 and carries on business of
manufacturing and exporting of HT Switchgears and Rubber Molding
Products. Defendant is engaged in the business of Polymer, Rubber
Moulding Products, Silicone Transparent Rubber Sheet , Silicone White
Rubber Sheets etc. Plaintiff has supplied goods to the defendant on
14/04/2018 for Rs. 12,142.20/-, on 24/4/2018 for Rs. 24,631.32/-,
on 27/04/2018 for Rs.2,017.80/-, on 04/05/2018 for Rs. 28,780.20/-,
on 11/05/2018 for Rs. 3,363/-, on 11/05/2018 for Rs. 31,470.60/-,
on 11/05/2018 for Rs.8,425.20/-, on 18/05/2018 for Rs.11,894.40/-,
on 25/05/2018 for Rs. 4,984.32/- and on 16/06/2018 for Rs.
30,886.50/-. Further, accordingly plaintiff has raised invoices on the
defendant. The plaintiff has supplied said goods to the defendant on
his address and same has been received by the defendant. The
defendant has neglected and failed to pay an amount of
Rs.1,68,684.54/- against goods supplied from time to time. The
plaintiff is entitled to recover the said amount from the defendant.
Plaintiff is also entitled for interest at the rate of 24% p.a. on the said
amount as mentioned in the invoices. Therefore, plaintiff issued
-- 2 of 8 --
3 SUM SU NO.596/2019
demand notice dated 05/10/2018 to the defendant and called upon
him to pay the outstanding amount. Defendant has received said
notice however, failed to repay the said amount. Hence, this suit.
03] Defendant appeared in the matter. Thereafter, plaintiff has
taken out Summons for Judgment No.07/2020, which came to be
disposed of 22/04/2024 and defendant was granted unconditional
leave to defend the suit. Defendant was at liberty to file its written
statement on or before next dated i.e. 24/06/2024. Defendant failed
to file its written statement. Therefore, order was passed to procee
matter without written statement on 24/06/2024.
04] In support of claim, the plaintiff filed affidavit of claim of
Mr. Narendra Jayantilal Gandhi, Director of plaintiff company as P.W.1
at Exh.7 and reiterated his contention for recovery of Rs.2,07,870/-
along with the further interest at the rate of 24% p.a. The plaintiff has
filed and relied upon the following documents. The plaintiff has closed
evidence vide pursis Exh.22.
Sr.
No. Exhibit Particulars
1 Exh.10 Office copy of Invoice No.020 dated 14/04/2018
with delivery challan.
2 Exh.11 Office copy of Invoice No.033 dated 24/04/2018
with delivery challan.
3 Exh.12 Office copy of Invoice No.036 dated 27/04/2018
with delivery challan.
4 Exh.13 Office copy of Invoice No.043 dated 04/05/2018
with delivery challan.
5 Exh.14 Office copy of Invoice No.047 dated 11/05/2018
with delivery challan and Transport Receipt and
credit note and debit note.
6 Exh.15 Office copy of Invoice No.048 dated 11/05/2018
with delivery challan and Transport Receipt.
-- 3 of 8 --
4 SUM SU NO.596/2019
7 Exh.16 Office copy of Invoice No.049 dated 11/05/2018
with delivery challan.
8 Exh.17 Office copy of Invoice No.060 dated 18/05/2018
with delivery challan.
9 Exh.18 Office copy of Invoice No.066 dated 25/05/2018
with delivery challan .
10 Exh.19 Office copy of Invoice No.092 dated 16/06/2018
with delivery challan.
11 Exh.20 Office copy of Notice dated 05/10/2018 with Postal
Receipt and A. D. Card.
12 Exh.21 Original Letter dated 13/02/2020 received
Nandwana Transport Service Proving deliveries to
the defendant Himsan Polymer.
05] Further, on perusing contentions of the plaintiff and
documents on record, following points arose for my consideration, to
which my findings are recorded for reasons given below.
Sr.
No.
Points Findings
1. Whether the plaintiff is entitled to
recover amount of Rs.2,07,870/- from
the defendant? If yes, at what rate of
interest ?
No
2. What order and decree? As per final order.
R E A S O N S
As to Points No. 1 and 2:-
06] Perused plaint, oral and documentary evidence on record.
Heard Ld. advocate for the plaintiff. Defendant failed to argue the
matter. The plaintiff has filed evidence on affidavit of Narendra
Gandhi P.W.1 who has reiterated contents in the plaint in his evidence
affidavit. It has come in his evidence that Plaintiff has supplied goods
to the defendant from time to time and raised invoices at Exh. 10 to
-- 4 of 8 --
5 SUM SU NO.596/2019
19. As per the plaintiff, goods to the tune of Rs. 1,68, 684. 54ps was
delivered to the defendant. The plaintiff along with invoices at Exh.10
to 19 has filed photocopy of transport receipt. The said copies being
photocopies are not marked as exhibits. It is pertinent to note that
neither invoices nor delivery challan are signed by the defendant.
Further, except these invoices and delivery challans, plaintiff has not
filed any documents on record to support its contention to show that
said invoices and delivery challans are served to the defendant. Thus,
it appears that plaintiff though raised invoices and has produced
delivery challan, there is nothing on record to show that goods were
delivered to the defendant.
07] Plaintiff has relied on demand notice dated 05/10/2018
at Exh.20 sent to the defendant. It appears that said notice is received
by the defendant however, there is nothing on record to show that
defendant had replied to the said notice. Further, plaintiff has relied
on letter dated 13/02/2020, received by Nandwana Transport Service
to prove goods delivered to the defendant. On perusing said
document, it appears that it is addressed by the Nandwana Transport
Service to the plaintiff to support the contention of the plaintiff that
goods were delivered. However, the plaintiff has not examined any
representative on behalf of Nandwana Transport Services. Further,
there is no pleading to that effect in the plaint nor it is stated in the
evidence affidavit of Narendra P.W.1. Therefore, said document
cannot be relied upon and considered in the evidence. Even otherwise
only on the basis of said document it cannot be said that plaintiff has
proved that goods were delivered to the defendant as contended by
him. It is pertinent to note that in evidence on affidavit Mr. Narendra
P.W.1 has contended that letter dated 05/02/2020 was sent to
Nandwana Transport Service to issue acknowledgment of Lorry
-- 5 of 8 --
6 SUM SU NO.596/2019
receipts and in response to the said letter Nandwana Transport Service
replied on 12/02/2020. It is pertinent to note that the plaintiff has
neither pleaded nor produced said letter dated 05/02/2020 and
12/02/2020. Therefore, I am of the view that plaintiff has absolutely
failed to prove that goods were supplied and delivered to the
defendant as contended by the plaintiff. Therefore, plaintiff is not
entitled for any relief claimed. Hence, I answer point No. 1 in
negative and in answer to point No. 2, I proceed to pass the following
order.
O R D E R
1) Summary Suit No. 596 of 2019 is hereby dismissed.
2) No order as to costs.
3) The decree be drawn up accordingly.
(Sangram. S. Shinde)
Adhoc Judge,
City Civil Court, Mazgaon, Mumbai.
C.R.No.81
Date- 05/02/2026
Dictated on : 05/02/2026
Corrected & signed on : 05/02/2026
-- 6 of 8 --
7 SUM SU NO.596/2019
“CERTIFIED TO BE TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF THE ORIGINAL
SIGNED JUDGMENT/ORDER”
UPLOAD DATE NAME OF STENOGRAPHER
06/02/2026 Mrs. V. V. Malgaonkar
Name of the Judge
(with Court Room No.)
Shri S. S. Shinde
C.R. No.81
Date of Pronouncement of JUDGMENT/
ORDER 05/02/2026
JUDGMENT/ORDER signed by P. O. on 05/02/2026
JUDGMENT/ORDER uploaded on 06/02/2026
-- 7 of 8 --
8 SUM SU NO.596/2019
-- 8 of 8 --