Interim Order 1

Order Details: Ex-parte Judgement
Pdf Text: Comm.Suit No. 169/19. 1 Ex-parte Judgment.
MHCC010098562019
Presented on : 24-09-2019
Registered on : 04-11-2019
Decided on : 09-03-2021
Duration : 1 years, 5 months, 15 days
IN THE BOMBAY CITY CIVIL COURT AT BOMBAY.
COMMERCIAL SUIT NO. 169 OF 2019
Exh.21.
M/S. SOGECO International S.A. )
Through its Constituted Power of Attorney )
Mr. Manikandan Ayyapan Pillai, Age: 47 years )
Having Registered Office at: )
Sogeco International S.A. )
Via San Salvatore 13 6900 )
Paradiso, Switzerland )
Address for correspondence )...Plaintiff
Versus
M/S Cargoways Shipping Pvt. Ltd. )
Through its directors and authorized signatories )
1. Ram Kotak Vasant ) (No W.S.)
2. Blossom Ram Kotak ) (Ex-parte)
Having registered office at )
203, Elphinstone House, )
17, Murzban Road, Mumbai – 400 001 )...Defendants
CORAM : SHRI G.G.BHANSALI.
(C.R.NO.31).
DATE : 9th MARCH, 2021.
-- 1 of 6 --
Comm.Suit No. 169/19. 2 Ex-parte Judgment.
Ms. Vidhya Iyengar, Advocate for Plaintiff.
Mr. Rajesh Sahani i/b Roys’ Law Firm, Advocate for Defendant No.1.
(No W.S.).
None for Defendant No.2. (Ex-parte).
JUDGMENT (EX-PARTE)
This is a suit for recovery of Rs.9,73,919.80 (Rupees Nine
Lakhs Seventy-three Thousand Nine Hundred Nineteen and Paise Eighty
Only) with interest at the rate of 24% p.a. The suit is based on various
invoices and agreement of settlement.
Plaintiff’s case is narrated as follows :
2. Plaintiff is a Switzerland based company, deals in the
business of trading, transport, maintenance and repair of containers. It
is in the name and style of “SOGECO International”. Defendant is a
private limited company, holds its registered office at Murzban Road,
Mumbai. Defendant deals in the business of broking depot services and
inspection services for containers. Defendant also deals in the business
of handling of storage and repairs of containers. Defendant runs the
business in the name and style of “M/s. Cargoways Shipping Private
Limited”. Defendant nos.2 and 3 are Directors and authorized
signatories of defendant no.1 company. In view of agreement between
plaintiff and defendants dated 01/10/2012, defendant no.1 has
accepted the agency of the plaintiff for the Indian territory. Since 2016,
defendants failed to make payments to some depots and to release
containers. Therefore, there was a termination letter dated
24/10/2016.
3. It is continued that in view of deliberations between them,
-- 2 of 6 --
Comm.Suit No. 169/19. 3 Ex-parte Judgment.
defendants have executed settlement agreement on 24/07/2017. It was
agreed to settle the dispute for USD 11,710 (INR 7,55,404.75).
However, defendant has paid the USD 3272.15. The principal amount
with interest of USD 9614.71 remain due towards defendants. Plaintiff
has engaged M/s. G. G. Marine Containers Private Limited to settle the
outstanding payment of the depot. Despite repeated demands and a
legal notice dated 31/10/2018, 01/11/2018 and 12/12/2018,
defendants are failed to repay the amount. Hence, plaintiff has claimed
for recovery of USD 9614.71 with interest at the rate of 20% i.e. INR
9,73,919.80 (Rupees Nine Lakhs Seventy-three Thousand Nine Hundred
Nineteen and Paise Eighty Only). Hence, this suit.
4. M/s. G. G. Marine Containers is also appointed as
Constituted Attorney by the plaintiffs. Hence, present suit is presented
by M/s. G. G. Marine Containers Private Limited.
5. On perusal of report of pre-institution mediation,
defendants were present and prayed for adjournment of two weeks.
However, mediation could not successful.
6. Perused service affidavit submitted by plaintiff dated
29/01/2021. Defendant no.1 appeared by filing V/P vide Exh.6.
However, defendant no.1 is failed to file W.S. Hence, suit is proceeded
‘No W.S.’ against defendant no.1 and ex-parte against defendant no.2.
7. Learned Adv. Iyengar for plaintiff requested to peruse chart
given on page no.99 vide Exh.17, wherein, the details of US Dollars and
Indian National Rupees is given. Accordingly, it is prayed for recovery
alongwith interest at the rate of 24% p.a.
-- 3 of 6 --
Comm.Suit No. 169/19. 4 Ex-parte Judgment.
8. In support to the plaint, PW 1 Manikandan Pillai deposed
before this Court vide Exh.8. In view of statement of PW 1, relevant
documents are marked vide Exh.9 to 18. It is clarified by the plaintiff
vide Exh.9 that defendant nos.2 and 3 are Directors of defendant no.1.
The genesis of present suit is agency agreement vide Exh.10 dated
29/09/2012. The agency of defendants came to be terminated vide
Exh.11 on 24/10/2016. The dispute in respect of recovery of rent and
other charges came to be settled by agreement Exh.12 dated
24/07/2017. Perused various e-mail vide Exh.13. Perused notices
issued by the plaintiff vide Exh.15 and 16.
9. Defendant no.1 appeared before the Court and engaged a
lawyer namely Rajesh Sahani by filing V/P vide Exh.6. However,
defendant no.1 is failed to file W.S. Hence, suit is proceeded ‘No W.S.’.
The intimation of ex-parte order is communicated to defendant no.2 by
e-mail. Defendant no.2 is also failed to appear. It infers that both
defendants admits the suit claim. Hence, suit deserves to be decreed.
10. On perusal of statement of recovery vide Exh.17 on page
no.99 alongwith Exh.8, plaintiff has given details of USD and
conversion in Indian National Rupees. The entire dues with defendants
is Rs.5,90,649.50. Interest at the rate of 20% p.a. claimed upto
30/04/2019 is Rs.1,73,270.30. In total, it become Rs.7,63,919.80.
However, in addition to said amount, plaintiff has claimed punitive
damages of USD 3,000 equal to Rs.2,10,000/-. It is surprising to note
that plaintiff has claimed the interest at the rate of 20% p.a. alongwith
punitive damages of USD 3,000 equal to Rs.2,10,000/-. Considering
table vide Exh.17, the punitive damages USD 3,000 equal to INR
2,10,000/- appears to be exorbitant. Hence, suit is partly decreed to the
-- 4 of 6 --
Comm.Suit No. 169/19. 5 Ex-parte Judgment.
tune of Rs.7,63,919.80 (Rupees Seven Lakhs Sixty-three Thousand Nine
Hundred Nineteen and Paise Eighty Only).
11. Plaintiff has claimed the interest at the rate of 24% p.a.
Admittedly, it is a business transaction. Considering entire facts on
record, the interest at the rate of 12% p.a. appears to be reasonable.
Hence, the order :
- ORDER -
1. Suit is partly decreed with cost.
2. Plaintiff is entitled to recover the amount of Rs.7,63,919.80
(Rupees Seven Lakhs Sixty-three Thousand Nine Hundred
Nineteen and Paise Eighty Only) jointly and severally, from
all defendants, with interest @ 12% p.a. from the date of
suit till realization, within two months from the date of
decree.
3. Decree shall be drawn accordingly.
(G.G.BHANSALI)
Judge,
City Civil & Sessions Court,
Date : 09/03/2021. Mumbai.
1. Dictated on : 09/03/2021.
2. Transcribed on : 10/03/2021.
3. Signed on : 12/03/2021.
4. Delivered to Certified :
Copy Section on
“CERTIFIED TO BE TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF THE ORIGINAL
-- 5 of 6 --
Comm.Suit No. 169/19. 6 Ex-parte Judgment.
SIGNED JUDGMENT/ORDER”
UPLOAD DATE AND TIME NAME OF STENOGRAPHER
12/03/2021. 1.36 p.m. Miss M.A.Kulkarni.
Name of the Judge (with Court Room no.) HHJ Shri G.G.Bhansali.
(Court Room No.31).
Date of Pronouncement of Judgment/Order 09/03/2021.
Judgment/Order signed by P.O. on 12/03/2021.
Judgment/Order uploaded on 12/03/2021.
-- 6 of 6 --