Final Order 1

Order Details: Ex-parte Judgement
Pdf Text: 1
MHCC010089342019
Presented on : 27082019
Registered on : 04112019
Decided on : 02032021
Duration : Y01 M06 D06
IN THE COURT OF SESSIONS FOR GREATER BOMBAY
COMMERCIAL SUIT NO. 170 OF 2019
A. Navinchandra Steels Pvt. Ltd. ]
A Company incorporated and registered ]
under the provisions of the Companies Act, 1956 ]
and having its, New Registered office at 704, Ecstasy ]
Commercial Building, Nirmal Life Style Ltd, City of Joy, ]
Jata Shankar Dosa Marg, Mulund (W) Mumbai 400080 ]
Maharashtra, through Mr. Mahesh Heliya, an Accounts ]
Manager of the plaintiff. ]
CIN No. U51420MH2000PTC127487 ]....Plaintiff
V/s
Shah Group Builders Limited ]
(Formerly known as Shah Group Builders Pvt.Ltd.) ]
Registered Office Address: 323329, ]
Arenja Corner, Plot No. 71, Sector17, Vashi, ]
Navi Mumbai400 705. ]
CIN No. U70101MH2005PLC154243. ]...Defendant
APPEARANCE:
Ld. Adv. S. P. Pandey for plaintiff.
Ld. Adv. Mr. Jayesh Nishar for defendant.
CORAM : HIS HONOUR ADDL.SESSIONS
JUDGE SHRI. SANJAY N. YADAV
(C.R.No.32).
DATED : 02nd March, 2021.
Claim : Suit for recovery of Money.
-- 1 of 9 --
2
EXPARTE JUDGMENT
(Dictated in Open Court)
The plaintiff by this suit seeks recovery of amount of
Rs.16,38,562.00 (Rupees Sixteen Lakhs Thirty Eight Thousand Five
Hundred and Sixty Two Only) with further interest at the rate of 18%
per annum on the principal amount of Rs.10,00,000/(Rupees Ten
Lakhs Only) from the date of filing of suit till its realization.
2. The facts giving rise to the suit in short can be stated as
follows:
The plaintiff is a Private Limited Company. On the request
and quotations orally confirmed purchase orders placed with the
plaintiff by the defendant, the plaintiff had supplied goods i.e. TMT
Bars to the defendant by purchasing them from several Rolling Mills.
The goods were directly sent to the Rolling Mills. The rolling mills used
to excise invoices with details of Truck number, material loaded, weight
of the material, name of the party ordering goods and name of the party
amongst the goods are to be supplied. After clearing, the goods were
transported with the defendant at the various designated address. The
orders were placed orally by the defendant and by written
communication. The quotations issued by the defendant are as follows:
Sr. No. P O No. P O Oty. No. MT PO Date
1 PO DT. 31.05.2016 43.000 31.05.2016
2 PO DT. 08.02.2017 37.000 08.02.2017
Total Qty. 80.000
3. The plaintiff had raised invoices to the defendant where
credit days agreed between the plaintiff and defendant were 30 days
and delayed payment was agreed contractually at the rate of 30% p.a.
-- 2 of 9 --
3
The defendant had received all the invoices and had acknowledged the
same. The goods were supplied by the plaintiff to the defendant on the
basis of cash credit with agreed contractual interest at the rate of 30%
p.a. Out of the outstanding amount of Rs.26,90,708/, the payment of
Rs.16,90,708/ was made by the defendant to the plaintiff. The
defendant was in arrears of Rs.10,00,000/. In the discussion, the
contractual rate of interest at the rate of 24% p.a. was agreed instead of
@ 30% p.a. for delayed payments. The defendant had acknowledged
the outstanding amount. Inspite of several reminders, the amount was
not paid by the defendant. The plaintiff, therefore, had issued the
notice dated 28.01.2019 to the defendant. The notice was received by
the defendant but the amount was not paid by him.
The plaintiff, therefore, had instituted the present suit for
recovery of amount of Rs.16,38,562.00/ with further interest at the
rate of 18% per annum on the principal amount of Rs.10,00,000/from
the date of filing of suit till its realization.
4. The defendant had appeared in the suit but had failed to
file the written statement. The suit proceeded exparte against
defendant.
5. The following points arise for my determination with my
findings thereon and the reasons to follow :
SR.
NO. POINTS FINDINGS
1 Whether the plaintiff is entitled for
recovery amount of Rs.16,38,562.00/
with further interest at the rate of 18%
per annum on the principal amount of
Rs.10,00,000/from the date of filing of
suit till its realization?
'In Affirmative'
-- 3 of 9 --
4
2 What order and decree? As per final order below.
REASONS
AS TO POINT NO. 1:
6. Heard learned Advocate Mr.S.P.Pandey for the plaintiff and
learned Advocate Mr. Jayesh Nishar for the defendant.
7. The plaintiff in support of its case had examined
Mr.Mahesh Heliya, Account Manager of the plaintiff at Exh. 06. The
plaintiff had relied upon following documents (Exh.07):
Sr. No. Particulars Exh.
1 Board Resolution dated 28th December 2018 9
2 Defendant Master Data from ROC 10
(colly)
3 Defendant Signatory Details from ROC 11
4 Form 23 certified copy from ROC department 12
(colly)
5 Copy of the quotation cum orally confirmed
purchase order
13
(colly)
6 Invoices issued by the plaintiffs and had
acknowledged by Authorized person of the
defendant with Rubber Stamps & Signature at their
register office
14
(colly)
7 Delivery Challans acknowledge by Authorized
person of the defendant with Rubber Stamps &
Signature at the site office
15
(colly)
8 Copies of the said Bank Statements of Abhyudaya
Co Operative Bank Ltd. Ghatkopar Branch of the
plaintiff
16
(colly)
9 Debit Notes acknowledged by Authorized person of
the defendant with signature at their register
office.
17
(colly)
-- 4 of 9 --
5
10 Copies of the said email reminders sent by Email
Address from
18
(colly)
11 Outstanding reminder letter dated 21.06.2018 19
(colly)
12 Postal receipt dated 21.06.2018 20
13 Ledger copy of Books of Account of the plaintiff
from 01.04.2015 to 31.03.2017 & 01.04.2017 to
31.01.2019.
21
(colly )
14 Outstanding shown in plaintiff books of account 22
15 Office copy of the said legal notice dated
21.01.2019
23
(colly)
16 Postal receipt dated 28.01.2019 24
17 Acknowledgement card showing receipt of demand
notice of defendant on dated 29.01.2019.
25
8. The plaintiff had relied upon quotation cum orally
confirmed purchase order (Exh.13 colly). The plaintiff further had
relied upon the invoices issued by the plaintiff and the same were
acknowledged by Authorized person of the defendant (Exh.14 colly).
The plaintiff also had relied upon delivery challans acknowledge of the
Authorized person of the defendant (Exh.15 colly). The plaintiff had
relied upon the debit notes acknowledge by the Authorized person of
the defendant (Exh.17 colly). The plaintiff further had relied upon e
mail reminders (Exh.18 & 19 colly), ledger books of account (Exh.21
colly.)
9. The evidence of the plaintiff points out that goods worth
Rs.26,90,708/ were supplied to the defendant. The defendant had
made payment of Rs.16,90,708/ o ut of the outstanding amount of
Rs.26,90,708/ . It is the evidence of the plaintiff that contractual
interest on failure to make payment was agreed by the defendant at the
-- 5 of 9 --
6
rate of 30% p.a. Further, in the discussions the rate of interest was
reduced upto 24% p.a. by the plaintiff. It is the evidence of the plaintiff
that contractual interest at the rate of 24% p.a. calculated till 27th
December, 2018 was Rs.6,38,562/. It is the evidence of the plaintiff
that defendant had failed to repay the principal amount as well as
interest accrued at the said amount. The learned Advocate for the
plaintiff had argued in the lines of the contentions raised by him in the
plaint. He had supported the evidence of the plaintiff.
10. The defendant had filed the written argument at Exh.27. It
is not in dispute that the suit proceeded without written statement
against defendant. The defendant was permitted to advance the
argument on law. It is argued by the defendant that this Court has no
jurisdiction to entertain the suit as materials were supplied to defendant
at Kharghar, Navi Mumbai. It is stated that cause of action has arisen in
Vashi, Navi Mumbai. It is stated that documents relied by the plaintiff
cannot be read in the evidence. It is argued by the defendant that there
was no Case Management Hearing in the present suit.
11. It is the contention of the plaintiff that the orders were
placed by the defendant with the plaintiff from its official address at
Kharghar, Navi Mumbai. The transactions regarding demand were
made at Mulund. Therefore, it cannot be said that this court has no
jurisdiction to entertain the suit.
The suit is proceeded without written statement. The
question of Case Management Hearing does not arise.
The other objections raised by the plaintiff for the
defendant are related to the factual aspects cannot be entertained.
It is not in dispute that amount of Rs.16,90,708/ is paid by
-- 6 of 9 --
7
the defendant. The defendant is in arrears of Rs.10,00,000/ to be paid
to the plaintiff. The plaintiff had claimed the interest Rs.6,38,562/as
agreed in the discussion with the defendant at the rate of 24% p.a. on
principal amount of Rs.10,00,000/. It is the evidence of the plaintiff
that the said fact is also acknowledged through debit notes by the
defendant.
12. The plaintiff had successfully shown that he had supplied
goods as per the orders placed by the defendant. The defendant had
made part payment but had failed to repay the total amount.
13. The defendant has failed to contest the suit. The defendant
though appeared in the suit had failed to file the written statement. It
therefore has to be inferred that the contentions raised by the plaintiff
are not challenged by the defendant. The evidence of the plaintiff have
gone unchallenged. The plaintiff is entitled to recover Rs.10,00,000/
and the interest Rs.6,38,562/at the rate of 24% p.a. on the said
amount till the filing of the suit.
14. The plaintiff in his pleading has stated that agreed rate of
interest is 24% p.a. but the plaintiff had further prayed the interest in
the suit at the rate of 18% p.a. on amount of Rs.10,00,000/ from the
date of filing of suit till its realization.
The plaintiff, therefore, is entitled for recovery of amount
of Rs.16,38,562.00/ with further interest at the rate of 18% per annum
on the principal amount i.e. Rs.10,00,000/ from the date of filing of
suit till its realization.
Hence I answered point No. 1 “in Affirmative.” In the result,
following order is passed.
-- 7 of 9 --
8
ORDER
1. Suit is decreed with costs.
2. The Defendant is directed to pay to the plaintiff a sum of
Rs.16,38,562.00/ (Rupees Sixteen Lakhs Thirty Eight Thousand Five
Hundred Sixty Two only) with further interest at the rate of 18% per
annum on the principal amount i.e. Rs.10,00,000/ (Rupees Ten
Lakhs Only) from the date of filing of suit till its realization.
3. Decree be drawn up accordingly.
(SANJAY N. YADAV)
Additional Sessions Judge
Date: 02.03.2021 Gr.Bombay at Mumbai.
Dictated on : 02.03.2021
Transcribed on : 05.03.21 & 06.03.2021
Signed by H.H.J.on : 09.03.2021
-- 8 of 9 --
9
“CERTIFIED TO BE TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF THE ORIGINAL
SIGNED JUDGMENT/ORDER”
09.03.2021 at 5.37p.m.
UPLOAD DATE AND TIME
(Mrs. K.S.Bhosale)
NAME OF STENOGRAPHER
Name of the Judge HHJ SHRI S.N.Yadav
(COURT ROOM NO.32)
Date of pronouncement of
judgment/order
02.03.2021
Judgment/order signed by P.O. on 09.03.2021
Judgment/order uploaded on 09.03.2021
-- 9 of 9 --