Final Order 1

Order Details: Ex-parte Judgement
Pdf Text: 1 Comm. Suit No.8352021
MHCC010108572019 Presented on : 19/10/2019
Registered on : 04/11/2019
Decided on : 16/02/2023
Duration : 3Y/3M/12D
Exh.33
IN THE CITY CIVIL COURT AT MUMBAI.
(Court Room No.32)
COMMERCIAL SUIT No.835 OF 2021
Ulyssys Promotions Private Limited,
a Private Limited Company [CIN
U74900MH2008PTC181235] incorporated
under the Companies Act, 1956 and having
its Registered Office at 10, Mistry
Chambers, Near Strand Cinema, Colaba,
Mumbai 400005
...PLAINTIFF
VERSUS
1) Baun Foundation Trust, a Public
Charitable Trust registered under the
Maharashtra Public Trusts Act, 1950
bearing Public Trust Registration No.
E2773 (Bom) having its Registered
Office at 9395, August Kranti Marg,
Mumbai 400036
2) Vijay Raghuram Shetty
3) Sarita Raghuram Shetty
4) Rajan Patel
5) Babukumar Shetty
All adults, Indian habitants and
Trustees of the Baun Foundation
Trust having their address at 95,
August Kranti Marg, Mumbai 400036
6) Cumballa Hill Hospital & Heart
Institute, a multispecialty Hospital
having its address at 9395, August
Kranti Marg, Mumbai 400036 ...DEFENDANTS
Shri. Ranjeet Vaghani, learned Advocate for plaintiff.
Defendant Nos. 1 to 5 : exparte.
-- 1 of 8 --
2 Comm. Suit No.8352021
Defendant No.6 : Suit dismissed in default
CORAM : JUDGE SHRI. N.P. TRIBHUWAN (C.R.NO.32)
E XP A R T E J U D G M E N T
(Delivered on 16/02/2023)
This is a suit for recovery of sum of Rs.17,54,528/ and
interest @ 12% p.a. on principal sum of Rs.12,04,459/ from the date of
suit till realization of amount.
2. It is case of plaintiff that it is a private limited company. It
is a public relations agency having more than 40 years association with
media houses, be it mainline dailies, regional dailies or magazines.
Plaintiff is also a corporate image branding agency with a proven track
record of building categories and brands. Its provides strategic crisis
management solutions and has Pan India network covering more than
150 cities.
3. Defendant no.1 is public charitable trust registered under
the Maharashtra Public Trusts Act, 1950. Defendant no.2 to 5 are
trustees of defendant no.1. Defendant no.6 is a hospital which is owned
by and was run and managed by defendant no.1 Trust. It is currently
managed by Asian Cancer Institute, Mumbai.
4. Plaintiff was appointed by defendant no.1 as its corporate
public relations agency for providing public relations services to the
defendant no.6 Hospital. The said appointment was as per terms and
conditions set out in letter dt.15/7/2016 alongwith annexure “A”. As
per aforesaid contract, the plaintiff was required to render services to
defendant no.6 for a period of 12 months from 15/7/2016 to
14/7/2017. Plaintiff through its division one, Paradigm Shift rendered
services to defendant no.6 every month from 15/7/2016 to 14/7/2017
-- 2 of 8 --
3 Comm. Suit No.8352021
as per aforesaid contract.
5. In consideration of rendering aforesaid services the plaintiff
time to time raised invoices on defendant no.1 as under :
Date Invoice Fees for work Amount
18/7/2016 083/CHH/0120162017 15.7.16 31.8.16 1,72,000/
1/10/2016 149/CHH/0220162017 September 2016 1,15,000/
1/11/2016 183/CHH/0320162017 October 2016 1,15,000/
2/11/2016 194/CHH/20162017 Out of pocket 2,518/
1/12/1016 210/CHH/0420162017 November 2016 1,15,000/
4/1/2017 240/CHH/0520162017 December 2016 1,15,000/
7/1/2017 264/CHH/20162017 Out of pocket 1,942/
1/2/2017 273/CHH/0620162017 January 2017 1,15,000/
2/3/2017 302/CHH/0720162017 February 2017 1,15,000/
2/4/2017 326/CHH/0820162017 March 2017 1,15,000/
2/5/2017 11/CHH/0120172018 April 2017 1,15,000/
3/6/2017 35/CHH/0220172018 May 2017 1,15,000/
30/6/2017 65/CHH/0320172018 June 2017 1,15,000/
6. As per the aforesaid contract, the defendant no.1 and/or
defendant no.6 was obliged to make payment of aforesaid invoices
within a period of 7 days from the date thereof. Defendant no.1 has
made payment of only first invoice above. Defendant no.1 & 6 failed
and neglected to make payment of remaining invoices. Therefore, in
June 2017 plaintiff through its CEO approached the defendant no.2
representing the defendant no.1 & 6 and requested to pay outstanding
dues. Defendant no.1 its letter dt.19/6/2017 signed by defendant no.2
acknowledged and admitted its liability towards the plaintiff and
undertook to clear all dues by 30/6/2017.
7. In view of undertaking given by defendant No.1, the
plaintiff agreed to reappoint as Corporate Public Relation Agency for
defendant No.1 for providing public relation services to defendant No.6.
-- 3 of 8 --
4 Comm. Suit No.8352021
The said reappointment was as per the terms and conditions set out in
the letter dtd.31/07/2017 signed by plaintiff and defendant No.1
through defendant No.2. By the said letter defendant No.1
unconditionally acknowledged and admitted its liability towards
plaintiff.
8. As per above subsequent contract, the defendant was
required to render services to defendant No.6 for a period of 12 months
from 15/07/2017 to 14/07/2018. Plaintiff has rendered services to
defendant No.6 in terms of the contract and accordingly raised two
invoices No.78/CHH/0420172018 dtd.21/07/2017 towards work
done in July 2017 for Rs.1,18,000/, No.107/CHH/0520172018
dtd.4/09/2017 towards work done in August 2017 for Rs.1,18,000/.
Defendant No.1 and/or, defendant No.6 was obliged to make payment
of above invoices within seven days. However they failed to make
payment. Therefore, plaintiff discontinued rendering its services to
defendant No.6 after 31/08/2017.
9. An aggregate amount of Rs.13,90,459/ is due and payable
by defendant No.1 and/or defendant No.6 towards aforesaid unpaid
invoices. Plaintiff has repeatedly requested the defendant No.2
representing the defendant No.2 and/or defendant No.6 to make
payment of above unpaid invoices. But defendant No.1 and or 6 failed
and neglected to pay the said amount. Therefore, plaintiff through its
advocate sent letter dtd.5/9/2019 to defendants and called upon them
to make the payment of aforesaid invoices. However, they did not
respond to the said letter.
10. Defendant Nos.1 to 6 are jointly and severally liable to pay
sum of R.13,90,459/ towards the invoices and Rs.3,64,069/ towards
-- 4 of 8 --
5 Comm. Suit No.8352021
interest calculated @ 12% p.a. (Total Rs.17,54,528/). Hence, this suit.
11. Defendant Nos.1 to 5 served with suit summons but they
did not appear. Hence, suit proceeded exparte against them. Plaintiff
has not taken steps against defendant No.6 to serve suit summons.
Plaintiff has filed pursis at Exh.32 for deleting name of defendant No.6.
In view of above facts suit dismissed in default to the extent of defenant
No.6 as per order dtd.3/2/2016.
12. On above facts following points arise for determination and
this court and recorded findings thereon for the reasons stated as under.
POINTS FINDINGS
1. Does the plaintiff prove that it has
provided “Public Relation Services to the
defendants ?
… Yes.
2. Does the plaintiff prove that defendant
Nos.1 to 5 are in outstanding principal sum
of Rs.17,54,528/ together with interest ?
…Yes.
Rs.15,68,528/
3. Whether plaintiff is entitled for the relief
claimed ?
...Yes.
4. What order and decree? ...As per final
order.
REASONS
AS TO POINT Nos.1 to 3 :
13. Heard learned counsel of Plaintiff. Plaintiff has examined
its Promoter and Chief Executor Officer (PW1 Mohan Sunder Rajan) to
prove its case. He reproduced all content of plaint in his chief
examination. His evidence is supported by documentary evidence :
invoices dtd.18/07/2016, 1/10/2016, 1/11/2016, 2/11/2016,
1/12/2016, 4/1/2017, 7/1/2017, 01/02/2017, 02/03/2017,
-- 5 of 8 --
6 Comm. Suit No.8352021
02/04/2017, 02/05/2017, 03/06/2017, 30/06/2017, 31/07/2017,
04/09/2017, email correspondence, letter dtd.31/7/2017, 5/09/2019,
15/07/2016, postal receipts and RPAD cards and web page of postal
authority (total Exh.12 to 30).
14. Evidence of PW1 and above documents shows that
plaintiff was appointed by defendant No.1 – Trust as its corporate
public relations agency for providing public relations services to
defendant No.6 Hospital. Plaintiff has provided services from time to
time and raised aforesaid invoices. As the defendants failed to make the
payment, plaintiff has demanded the said outstanding dues by email
and demand letters.
15. Evidence of PW1 remained unchallenged. His evidence is
supported by documentary evidence mentioned in para supra. There is
no reason to disbelieve his testimony. As per contents of plaint
defendants are in outstanding principal sum of Rs.12,04,459/ but
plaintiff has mentioned in particulars of claim that the outstanding
principal sum is Rs.13,90,459/ + interest of Rs.3,64,069/. Thus, the
contents of plaint has to be taken into consideration for calculating the
outstanding dues. Hence, defendant Nos.1 to 5 are in outstanding
principal sum of Rs.12,04,459/ + interest of Rs.3,64,069/ Total :
Rs.15,68,528/. Plaintiff claimed interest @ 12% p.a. Defendant Nos.1
to 5 have deprived the plaintiff from using the said amount. Therefore,
plaintiff is entitled for the interest @ 12% p.a. Hence, plaintiff is
entitled for relief claimed. Hence, I answered point Nos.1 to 3 as above.
Hence, I pass the following order.
ORDER
1. Suit is partly decreed with costs as under.
-- 6 of 8 --
7 Comm. Suit No.8352021
2. The defendant Nos.1 to 5 are jointly and severally
directed to pay to plaintiff the amount of Rs.15,68,528/
and interest @ 12% p.a. on principal sum of
Rs.12,04,459/ from the date of suit till realization of the
said amount
3. Decree be drawn up accordingly.
Date : 16/02/2023.
(N.P. Tribhuwan)
Judge, City Civil Court,
Mumbai. C.R.No.32
-- 7 of 8 --
8 Comm. Suit No.8352021
Dictated on :16/02/2023.
Checked on :16/02/2023.
Signed on :16/02/2023.
CERTIFIED TO BE TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF THE ORIGINAL
SIGNED JUDGMENT/ORDER”
16/02/2023. Mrs.Rupali S. Bhor
UPLOAD DATE AND TIME NAME OF STENOGRAPHER
Name of the Judge(with CR
No.)
HHJ SHRI. N. P. TRIBHUVAN
(C.R.No.32)
Date of pronouncement of Order 16/02/2023.
Order signed by P.O. on 16/02/2023.
Order uploaded on 16/02/2023.
-- 8 of 8 --