Case Details

M/S Bhagwati Industries A Prop M/S Kumar Metal Pvt Ltd Vs M/S Stallion Impex

Case Details

casenoCase TypeSum.Civ.Suit
casenoFiling Number139/2018
casenoRegistration Number7/2018
caseno Filing Date26-02-2018
hearingRegistration Date26-02-2018
hearingFirst Hearing Date26th February 2018
dateDecision Date11th January 2019
casestatusCase StatusCase Disposed
courtCourt Number and Judge1-Jt.Civil Judge J.D.Kalyan;
natureNature of DisposalUncontested--Decreed Ex-Parte;

Petitioners & Respondents

contactsPetitioner

M/S Bhagwati Industries A Prop M/S Kumar Metal Pvt Ltd, ;

contactsPetitioner Advocate

Z N Kazi;

contacts Respondent Name

M/S Stallion Impex;

Order Details

info-icon

Order Details

Order not found.

Final Order Judgement

orderdateOrder Date11-01-2019 documents
                                                      ­1 ­                          Sum. Suit No.07/2018                                                                                Judg...Exh.17                   Presented on   : 22/02/2018        Registered on  : 22/02/2018       Decided on      : 11/01/2019        Duration      : 00Y.10M.20D. IN THE COURT OF JOINT CIVIL JUDGE J.D., KALYAN, DIST. THANE.       ( Presided over by Nilima A.Wankhade) SUMMARY SUIT  NO. 07/2018.       Exh.No.17  CNR NO – MHTH08­000140­2018 M/s.Bhagawati Industries a proprietary concern of  M/s.Kumar Metals Pvt.Ltd. Through its authorized Signatory Mr.Banwarilal L. Bagaria Age 69 years,Occu:Business, having their factory at EF­7, Mini Indl.Estate, Konkan Vikas, Shahsput, Dist. Thane and Administrative & Accounts Office at Shop No.3,  Sai Sankul Annex, Barave Road, Khadakpada , Kalyan(W),Dist.Thane.            ….. Plaintiff.          V/s. M/s.Stallion Impex a Proprietary concern through its Proprietor Mr.Chintan Pradip Shah, Adult, Occu.Business, having their Principal Place of business at A­1, Lotus Building, Whispering Medows, Model town,  Near Ganesh Temple off B.R.Road,  Mulund(W), Mumbai­400 080.      .....Defendant. ­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­ Ld. Adv. Shri. Z.N.Kazi for the plaintiff. Exparte  against the defendant.  ..2..     Sum. Suit No.07/2018                                                                                            Judg...Exh.17      :    J U D G M E N T : (Delivered on 11th       day of January, 2019 ) 1] This   is   a   suit   for   recovery   of   Rs.48,560/­   and   interest thereon under Order XXXVII of  The Code of Civil Procedure, 1908  2] In   short,   the   plaintiff   is   a   proprietary   concern   of   M/s. Kumar  Metals  Pvt.Ltd.,   a   company   registered  under   the  Companies Act,   1956   engaged   in   manufacturing   quality   adhesive   powder   and industrial dextrine.   The defendant is a proprietary concern dealing in manufacturing of corrugated boxes and allied works. Both were having business terms as defendant was purchasing various materials such as modified starch powder from the plaintiff. The defendant was irregular in   clearing  his  dues  on   time,  which  were  due   and   liable   to  pay   to plaintiff   for   materials   supplied   to   him.   Hence,   the   plaintiff   had discontinued all the transactions with him. Thereafter, the defendant has visited the office of the plaintiff and showed his interest to continue the business with the plaintiff. The plaintiff restarted business transaction believing the commitment of defendant and having faith on his words that he will do business with the plaintiff with honestly and clear all his dues within 45 to 60 days from the date of supply of material. 3] The defendant placed order of   starch powder   weighing about   590   kg.   amounting   to   Rs.24,019/­   including     C.G.S.T.   and S.G.S.T.  on 05/07/2017.  The defendant  assured  to  clear  dues as  per present bill within 15 days of receipt of goods. Accordingly, plaintiff                                                        ­3 ­                          Sum. Suit No.07/2018                                                                                Judg...Exh.17      delivered the goods to the defendant.   Despite of delivery of goods to the   defendant   ,   he   failed   to   pay   bill   amount.   On   23/08/2017   again defendant approached to the plaintiff and assured the plaintiff that he would pay previous bill along with new order he is going to place.  The plaintiff  again   fell  prey  to  defendant  and delivered 40 kg.  Modified starch powder for the amount of Rs. 19,541/­ including C.G.S.T. and S.G.S.T. Accordingly, the goods were delivered to the defendant. The defendant again failed to repay outstanding bill. Considering continuous default of the defendant, plaintiff issued  reminder letters dt 28/09/2017, 24/10/2017   &   03/11/2017   and   27/11/2017   to   the   defendant   about outstanding   amount.   Despite   of   letters   defendant   failed   to   make payment. Finally,  plaintiff issued notice on 06/01/2018 and demanded outstanding amount of bills dated 05/07/2017 and 23/07/2017.  He also asked for  Rs.5000/­   towards   the expenses  of   the notice.    Despite  of notice   defendant   failed   to   make   repayment   of   outstanding   amount. Hence,   present   suit   is   filed   for   the   recovery   of   43,560/­   alongwith interest @ 25% p.a. and Rs.5000/­ towards notice chages. 4] Despite   of   service   of   summons   the   defendant   failed   to appear   and   to   take   leave   to   defend.   The   suit   is   proceeded   exparte against the defendant.  5] Following   point,   therefore   arise   for   consideration   and findings are recorded thereon with  reasons as under : ..4..     Sum. Suit No.07/2018                                                                                            Judg...Exh.17      SR.No. POINT    FINDING. 1.  Whether   the   plaintiff   proved   that   the goods worth Rs. 43,560/­ are supplied to the defendant on credit ?  Affirmative 2. Is   plaintiff   entitled   to   recover   amount alongwith   interest   @   24%   p.a.   thereon from the defendant?  Affirmative. 3. What order and decree ?   Suit is decreed with costs.                                :REASONS : POINT NO.1 AND 2:­ 6] Plaintiff Banwarilal has examined himself as (P.W.1) vide Exh.6. Besides the plaintiff has relied on  documents (Exh.9 to 16).  As against this, the defendant failed to adduce any evidence.  7] In sum and substance plaintiff (P.W.1)deposed that  it is a company registered under the companies Act and it had business term with   the   defendant.   The   defendant   placed   order   on   05/06/2017   and 23/08/2017 in respect of starch powder. On the assurance of defendant that  he would   pay entire bill  amount,  plaintiff  delivered  the goods. Despite of repeated demand,  the defendent failed to  pay amount of Rs. 24,019/­ & Rs.19,541/­.  Plaintiff issued reminder letters on 28/09/2017, 24/10/2017,   3/11/2017   &   27/11/2017,   but   the   defendant   avoided   to make   payments.   Finally,   plaintiff   issued   notice   on   06/1/2018.   The defendant failed to pay bill amount. The evidence of plaintiff remains unrebutted on record.                                                        ­5 ­                          Sum. Suit No.07/2018                                                                                Judg...Exh.17      8] The   case   of   the   plaintiff   is   based   on   documentory   evidence, hence, relevant documents need to be looked into. Tax invoice Exh.9 and Exh.11 go  to  show that   the defendant  placed order of  modified starch  powder  on 05/07/2017 and 23/08/2017.  Accordingly,  plaintiff delivered the goods to  the defendant vide invoice No.G­8 Exh.10 & Exh.12.     Notice   Exh.14   and   receipt   Exh.15   demonstrate   that   the plaintiff issued notice to the defendant and demanded the outstanding amount. Despite of notice defendant failed to pay outstanding amount. 9] The oral  and documentary evidence on the point  of  non payment of outstanding amount by the defendant has not been subjected to cross examination. Therefore, it remained unchallenged on record. So, it stands proved that the plaintiff supplied goods Rs. 43,560/­ on credit. On the other hand the defendant failed to adduced any evidence to show that he infact cleared the dues to the plaintiffs.   10] The   plaintiff   on   the   strength   of   oral   and   documentary evidence   succeeded   in   proving   that   it   is   entitled   to   claim   the   said amount. Now the point is what is the agreed rate of interest. Tax invoice Exh.11   shows   that   the   interest   rate   @   of   24%   will   be   charged   on overdue payment. The said interest is also not denied by the defendant. Therefore, plaintiff  is entitled for interest as agreed.   The plaintiff  is also   entitled   to   costs  of   the   suit.  Considering  all   the  above   facts,   I answer point nos.1 and 2 in affirmative. ..6..     Sum. Suit No.07/2018                                                                                            Judg...Exh.17      POINT NO.3:   In result, I pass following order.         ORDER 1] The suit is decreed with cost. 2] The defendant do pay Rs.43,560/­(Rs. Forty three  Thousand Five Hundred Sixty Only) to the plaintiff  alongwith interest @24%p.a. from the date of suit  till its realization.   3] Decree be drawn up accordingly.  Kalyan.            ( Nilima A.Wankhade ) Date :­ 11/01/2019                        Jt. Civil Judge, J.D., Kalyan.