Final Order 1

Order Details: Other
Pdf Text: ..1.. Summons for Judgment
No.273/2019
MHCC010120982019
IN THE BOMBAY CITY CIVIL COURT FOR GREATER MUMBAI
SUMMONS FOR JUDGMENT NO.273 OF 2019
(CNR NO.MHCC01-012098-2019)
IN
SUMMARY CIVIL SUIT NO.52 OF 2019
Ramchand Atmaram Nagpal )..Applicant/
Original Plaintiff
In the matter between
Ramchand Atmaram Nagpal )..Plaintiff
Versus
Techno Sat Comm (India) Pvt. Ltd. )
and others. )..Defendants
Appearance :
Learned Adv. Bhargavi Rawal for plaintiff.
None for defendants.
CORAM : HIS HONOUR JUDGE
SHAIKH AKBAR SHAIKH JAFAR
COURT ROOM NO.15.
DATE : 18/08/2023
O R D E R
1 The plaintiff has filed this summary suit is filed for
recovery of amount. Defendant No.1 is a company and Defendant
-- 1 of 5 --
..2.. Summons for Judgment
No.273/2019
Nos.2 and 3 are the directors of the company. It is the case of the
plaintiff that the defendants have drawn two demand bills of exchange,
one of Rs.10,00,000/- on 22/06/2017 and another of Rs.5,00,000/- on
11/10/2017 in favour of plaintiff. The defendant Nos.2 and 3 have
accepted sum for payment. The amount of Rs.15,00,000/- was paid to
defendant No.1 by plaintiff by two payee’s Account Cheques. It is the
contention of plaintiff that defendant No.1 made repayment in part
amounts i.e. Rs.6,50,000/- towards bill dated 22/06/2017 and
Rs.3,00,000/- towards bill dated 11/10/2017. Thus, total of
Rs.9,50,000/- is paid through various modes to the plaintiff and
amount of Rs.5,50,000/- is still outstanding. It is the contention of the
plaintiff that the bills of exchange of outstanding amount Rs.5,50,000/-
was presented to defendant Nos.2 and 3 for payment and thereafter, to
defendant No.1, but they neglected to pay, hence, the said bills were
dishonoured. It is further contended that the defendant No.1 issued
two cheques for repayment of balance due amount under the bills of
exchange, but same were dishonoured by bank with bank memo “Refer
to Drawer”. Therefore, according to the plaintiff, he is entitled to
charge the interest at the rate of 18% per annum against the
defendants on balance due amount of Rs.5,50,000/- and prayed for
decree of the said amount.
2 In response to the writ of summons for appearance, the
defendant appeared and filed their vakalatnama on record. The
learned advocate has tendered his
vakalatnama. The plaintiff has taken
out the summons for judgment and served the copy of same to the
defendants on the address of their advocate vide affidavit of service
-- 2 of 5 --
..3.. Summons for Judgment
No.273/2019
vide Exhibit-07. However, the defendants remained absent and did
not file reply, therefore, the matter proceeded further.
3 The plaintiff has filed three documents on record. On
perusing the Bills of exchange (Exhibit-09 and Exhibit-10) it manifests
therefrom that the defendants have signed the said documents. The
defendant Nos.2 and 3 have signed in their personal capacity and as
the director of defendant No.1 and have accepted the liability to pay
the amount under the bills of exchange.
4 It is the contention of the learned advocate for the plaintiff
that the defendants have paid Rs.9,50,000/- out of Rs.15,00,000/- and
Rs.5,50,000/- is still remaining to be paid. Thus, there is no reason to
disbelieve the words of the plaintiff. Moreover, the failure on the part
of the defendants to reply the summons for judgment shows that claim
of plaintiff is accepted to the defendants and they have no defence to
raise in their favour. Moreover, the record shows that the defendant
No.1 has issued tow cheques of total amount of Rs.5,50,000/-, which
were dishonoured, hence, the plaintiff has proved his claim. Thereafter,
the plaintiff issued a letter on 28/08/2018, calling upon the
defendants to pay the outstanding due amount alongwith interest.
Hence, summons for judgment deserves to be allowed for recovery of
bills amounting to Rs.5,50,000/-.
5 So far as the interest is concerned, there is no document to
show that there was an agreement regarding the schedule of payment
and interest thereupon. The defendants have paid the part amount but
failed to repay the outstanding due amount of Rs.5,50,000/-. Thus, on
-- 3 of 5 --
..4.. Summons for Judgment
No.273/2019
issuance of notice, it became incumbent on the defendants to pay the
amount due. In absence of any agreement regarding interest, it cannot
be said that the plaintiff is entitled for charging interest at the rate of
18% per annum. However, the failure on the part of the defendants to
pay the balance due amount shows that the amount remaining is lying
with the defendants. Had it been paid to the plaintiff as per demand,
he would have invested and would have earned profit therefrom.
Therefore, I am of the view that the plaintiff is entitled for interest at
the rate of 9% per annum. from the date of default till its full
realisation. Hence, I proceed to pass the following order :-
ORDER
1. Summons for Judgment No.273/2019 in Summary
Civil Suit No.52/2019, is hereby allowed.
2. Summary Civil Suit No.52/2019, stands decreed.
3. The defendants do pay the plaintiff sum of
Rs.5,50,000/- alongwith interest at the rate of 9% per
annum from the date of default i.e. 28/08/2018, till
its full realisation.
4. Decree be drawn up accordingly.
5. Court fees, if any, be refunded as per rule.
(Order dictated and pronounced in open Court)
(Shaikh Akbar Shaikh Jafar)
Judge, City Civil Court, Gr. Bombay.
Date: 18/08/2023. C.R. No.15
Dictated on : 18/08/2023.
Transcribed on : 18/08/2023.
Draft corrected on : 19/08/2023.
Signed by HHJ on : 19/08/2023.
-- 4 of 5 --
..5.. Summons for Judgment
No.273/2019
“Certified to be true and correct copy of the original signed order”.
19/08/2023 (Ms.Sonali Sawant)
at about 4.50 p.m. Stenographer (Grade-III)
Name of the Hon'ble Judge : Shaikh Akbar Shaikh Jafar,
Judge, City Civil Court and
Addl. Sessions Judge
Court Room No.15, Gr. Mumbai
Date of pronouncement of Order : 18/08/2023
Order signed by Hon'ble Judge on : 19/08/2023
Order uploaded on : 19/08/2023
at about 4.50 p.m.
-- 5 of 5 --