Final Order 1

Order Details: Ex-parte Judgement
Pdf Text: Presented on 24.04.2018
Registered on 11.06.2018
Decided on 29.01.2019
Duration Yrs. M. Days
07 18
CNR No.
EXH.
IN THE BOMBAY CITY CIVIL COURT AT BOMBAY
SUMMARY SUIT NO.577 OF 2018
M/S. SAVLA TRADERS, Through its Partner
Mr.Hitendra Amritlal Savla, Having office
address at 4, Parvati Sadan, 13, Keshvaji
Naik Road, Mumbai400 009. ...Plaintiff.
V/s.
Irfan Rahim Salema @ Jeeva,
age not known, Goregaon Aarey Milk
Colony, Unit NO.32, Goregaon East,
Mumbai400 065. ...Defendant
Appearances:
Ld. Adv Mr.Jeetendra Ranawat for plaintiff.
None for defendant. Hence, suit proceeded exparte against defendant.
CORAM : HIS HONOUR JUDGE
SHRI ABHIJEET A.
NANDGAONKAR
(C.R.No.20)
DATED : 29th January,2019
J U D G M E N T
(Exparte)
This is a suit for recovery of Rs.6,75,398/ with interest.
2. In short, plaintiff came with a case that, plaintiff is a General
Merchants and Commission Agents of Seeds of Oil Cake. Defendant has
placed order for the said goods to plaintiff and time to time plaintiff
MHCC01-005536-2018
-- 1 of 5 --
.. j/2 .. Summary Suit No.577/2018
sold, supplied and delivered the goods to defendant under various
invoices. The details of the invoices are as under :
Sr.
No.
Date Invoice No. Amount (Rs.)
1 04.09.2012 7240 80,900/
2 10.11.2012 7302 48,000/
3 08.07.2013 7589 55,200/
4 22.07.2013 7598 55,240/
5 10.08.2013 7613 55,200/
Rs.2,94,540/
3. Plaintiff submitted that, they delivered the goods to defendant
through his traders by transport and same has been acknowledged by
defendant. Defendant used the goods in his daytoday business and
never raised grievances of any kind till date regarding, quality, quantity
of goods. In regular course of business plaintiff maintained ledger
account of defendant. Defendant issued cheque bearing No.490537
dt.02.09.2013 for the sum of Rs.55,200/ drawn on The Pratap Co
operative Bank Limited, Kandivali (East), Mumbai101. However, the
said became dishonoured when presented in the bank for encashment.
After talks with defendant assured to plaint that he will clear the dues.
Thereafter, defendant issued cheque bearing NO.057745 dt.17.12.2015
for the sum of Rs.35,000/ drawn on Union Bank of Goregaon (East),
Mumbai63. However, the said cheque was also dishonoured when
present in the bank and thereafter, defendant did not make the
payment of outstanding dues to plaintiff. Therefore, plaintiff filed this
suit against defendant for recovery of outstanding amount.
4. Writ of summons came to be issued against defendant. Plaintiff
filed service affidavit. In spite of service defendant did not dare to
-- 2 of 5 --
.. j/3 .. Summary Suit No.577/2018
appear before the Court. Hence, suit proceeded exparte against
defendant.
5. In order to prove its claim plaintiff filed affidavit of evidence of
Hitendra Amritlal Sala at Exh.6 and list of documents at Exh.6. During
the course of hearing plaintiff proved the following documents :
Exh.7 Copy of the invoices.
Exh.8 Copy of challans.
Exh.9 Copy of cheque and memo
Exh.10 Copy of cheque and memo.
6. Heard learned Advocate for plaintiff. Perused the record and
submissions.
7. On perusal of invoices and challans is crystal clear that, plaintiff
had supplied the goods as per request of defendant. Defendant
received the said goods as well as invoices without any objection
whatsoever. Therefore, defendant is liable to pay the amount as per
invoices for the goods received by him. However, defendant failed to
make the payment of goods. Defendant's procrastination to pay the
dues to plaintiff is also reflected from the dishonour of the cheques,
which had been given by him to plaintiff in lieu of payment. But said
cheques came to be dishonoured. It also shows the attitude of
defendant towards nonpayment of dues of plaintiff.
8. In spite of service of writ of summons defendant did not dare to
appear before the Court and contest the suit. Therefore, claim of
plaintiff remains unchallenged and unrebutted. The documents
produced and proved by plaintiff are also uncontroverted. Hence, claim
-- 3 of 5 --
.. j/4 .. Summary Suit No.577/2018
put forth by plaintiff and affidavit of evidence of its witness remain
unchallenged and unrebutted. Therefore, suit filed by plaintiff for
recovery under O.XXXVII R.2 of C.P.C. needs to be accepted. Defendant
neither present nor rebutted the claim of plaintiff. Which clearly
establishes the claim of plaintiff
9. In spite of repeated requests and demand defendant failed to pay
the amount due and payable, which forced plaintiff to approach this
Court for recovery amount. Therefore, costs of this suit needs to be
saddled on defendant. Plaintiff is entitled to recover the outstanding
amount as per agreed rate of interest as mentioned in the invoices.
10. The suit remains unchallenged and undefended. Therefore,
under partIII, R(E), schedule I of Bombay City Civil & Sessions Court
Rule, 1948 plaintiff becomes entitled for refund of 2/3rd court fee
voucher, if prayed. In the result, suit deserves to be decreed with costs.
Hence, I proceed to pass the following order :
O R D E R
1. Suit is decreed with costs.
2. Defendant do pay Rs.6,75,398/ along with interest
@ 24 % per annum on principal outstanding amount to
plaintiff from the date of filing of this suit till realization
of entire decreetal amount.
3. Defendant do bear hisr own costs with costs of plaintiff.
4. Decree be drawn up accordingly.
5. The 2/3rd Court fee refund voucher, as per rule, be
issued in favour of plaintiff, if prayed.
( ABHIJEET A. NANDGAONKAR )
Judge, (C.R.No.20)
Dt.: 29/01/2019 City Civil Court, Gr. Mumbai
Dictated on : 29.01.2019
Transcribed on : 29.01.2019
Signed on : 29.01.2019 kps/
-- 4 of 5 --
.. j/5 .. Summary Suit No.577/2018
“CERTIFIED TOBE TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF THE ORIGINAL
SIGNED JUDGMENT/ORDER”
29.01.2019 at 2.45 p.m.
UPLOAD DATE AND TIME
(KISHOR PRAKASH SHERWADE)
NAME OF STENOGRAPHER
Name of the Judge HHJ SHRI A.A.
NANDGAONKAR
(COURT ROOM NO.20)
Date of pronouncement of judgment/order 29.01.2019
Judgment/order signed by P.O. on 29.01.2019
Judgment/order uploaded on 29.01.2019
-- 5 of 5 --