Order 1

Order Details: Ex-parte Judgement
Pdf Text: 1
MHCC010062112018 Presented on : 05-05-2018
Registered on : 19-06-2018
Decided on : 01-12-2021
Duration : Y M D
03 06 04
BEFORE THE CITY CIVIL COURT, MUMBAI
( Court No.14 )
(Presided Over by Sunil U. Hake)
COMMERCIAL SUIT NO.681 OF 2021
SUMMARY SUIT NO.642 OF 2018
Ex.09
M/s. Pinnacle Industrial Controls Pvt Ltd
a Private Limited Company, Registered
under the Companies Act, 1956
Having its registered office at J208, Ansa
Industrial Estate, Saki Vihar Road, Sakinaka,
Andheri East, Mumbai 400072
Through its Director,
Mr.Sunil Madhukar Raut. ..Plaintiff
Versus
1. Linear power control,
A Firm, Having address at,
B/105, Shatrunjaygiri,
Kandivali(East),
Mumbai400101.
2. Mr.Chetan R.Upadhyay,
An adult, Indian Inhabitant,
Occu, Business,
Authorized Person of
Linear power control,
B/105, Shatrunjaygiri,
Kandivali(East),
Mumbai400101. ..Defendants
-- 1 of 6 --
2
__________________________________________________________
Ld. Advocate A.M.Bhilare with Ld. advocate Arvind Taral for
plaintiff.
Defendants Exparte._______________________________________
JUDGMENT
(Dated this 1st day of December, 2021)
1. Suit is for recovery of an amount of Rs.3,69,477/
alongwith future interest.
2. Briefly stated, plaintiff's case, is as under:
Plaintiff is a private limited company. Defendant
No.1 is a firm and defendant No.2 is the authorized person of
defendant No.1. In pursuance to the orders placed by defendants,
plaintiff supplied goods to defendants alongwith delivery
challans. Plaintiff also raised invoices at the time of supply of
goods. Invoices were duly received by defendants. Defendants
accepted delivery of goods. They did not make dispute regarding
quality, quantity and rate of delivered goods. Plaintiff maintained
the ledger account of defendants. As per ledger account
maintained by plaintiff, an amount of Rs.2,79,304/ was due
against defendants. Plaintiff claimed interest at the rate of 24%
p.a. and calculated the interest amount accordingly from
27/08/2014 till filing of the suit. The outstanding amount
alongwith interest at the rate of 24% p.a. comes to Rs.3,69,477/.
Plaintiff issued notices dated 17/08/2015 and 11/12/2015.
These notices were duly served upon defendants, but, defendants
failed to pay the outstanding amount. Hence, this suit.
-- 2 of 6 --
3
3. Plaint was initially presented before Dindoshi branch
of City Civil Court. On 02/05/2018, plaint was returned for
presenting it before appropriate Court. Plaint was presented
before City Civil Court at Mumbai on 05/05/2018.
4. As per Service affidavits(Ex.2 & 5), defendants were
duly served with writ of summons. But, they failed to tender their
appearance. Therefore, suit proceeded without appearance of
defendants.
5. Heard Ld. advocate for plaintiff.
6. Following points arise for determination, findings
thereon for the reasons to follow are as under:
Sr.No. Points Findings
1. Does the plaintiff prove that an
amount of Rs.2,79,304/ was
outstanding, as on 27/08/2014
against the defendants?
Proved
2. What order? Suit is partly decreed as
per final order.
REASONS
Point No.1
7. In order to substantiate the claim, plaintiff has filed
claim affidavit of PW1 Sunil Madhukar Raut. He has reiterated
all the facts pleaded in the plaint. PW1 Sunil testifies that in
pursuance to the purchase orders placed by defendants, goods
were supplied under delivery challans and accordingly invoices
were raised. Plaintiff has filed on record original documents such
as tax invoices and delivery challans. The original documents
-- 3 of 6 --
4
filed on record shows that delivery of the goods is duly
acknowledged. Defendants made last payment on 27/08/2014.
The statement of account shows that an amount of Rs.2,79,304/
was outstanding against defendant as on 27/08/2014. As
discussed supra, suit proceeded without appearance of
defendants. Therefore, plaintiff's claim regarding outstanding
amount of Rs.2,79,304/, which is supported by original
documents on record, needs to be accepted. Point No.1
answered accordingly.
8. Plaintiff claimed interest at the rate of 24% p.a. from
27/08/2014 and accordingly filed the suit for an amount of Rs.
3,69,477/. The original delivery notes and tax invoices are filed
on record. However, the rate of interest is not mentioned in the
documents filed on record. Thus, it can be inferred that the rate
of interest claimed by plaintiff is not the rate of interest agreed by
defendants. Therefore, plaintiff is not entitled to get interest at
the rate of 24% p.a. from 27/08/2014. However, record shows
that present transaction is a commercial transaction. Liability of
defendant arises out of commercial transaction. Taking into
consideration, the nature of transaction, plaintiff is entitled to get
interest at the rate of 18% p.a. from 27/08/2014 till it's
realization. In the result, following order:
ORDER
1. Suit is partly decreed with costs.
2. Defendants shall pay an amount of Rs.2,79,304/ (Rs.
Two lacs, Seventy Nine Thousand, Three Hundred and
Four only) with interest @ 18% p.a. from 27/08/2014
till it's realization to plaintiff within two months.
-- 4 of 6 --
5
3. Court fees be refunded as per (E) Rules framed under
Section 11(2) of the Bombay City Civil Court Act, 1948,
for the refund of Institution Fee.
4. Decree thus follow.
01/12/2021 SUNIL U.HAKE
JUDGE,
CITY CIVIL COURT,
GR.MUMBAI.
Dictated on : 01/12/2021
Transcribed on : 01/12/2021
Signed on : 01/12/2021
-- 5 of 6 --
6
CERTIFIED TO BE TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF THE
ORIGINAL SIGNED JUDGMENT/ORDER”.
01/12/21 at 05.30 pm.
Mrs.Tanushree C.Kamble
Name of the Judge HHJ SHRI SU Hake
Date of Pronouncement of
judgment/order
01/12/21
Judgment and order signed by
P.O.
01/12/21
Judgment/order uploaded on 01/12/21
-- 6 of 6 --