Ms.Parlika vs Ms.Banka I

Ms.Parlikar Sons Vs Ms.Banka India Ltd And 1 Other

Case Details

Case Type	Sum.Civ.Suit
Filing Number	600011/2000
Registration Number	600011/2000
Filing Date	06-10-2000
Registration Date	06-10-2000

First Hearing Date	14th July 2009
Decision Date	25th August 2011
Case Status	Case Disposed
Court Number and Judge	4-4Th Jt.Civil Judge S.D. Kalyan;
Nature of Disposal	Contested--Judgment;

Petitioners & Respondents

Petitioner

Ms.Parlikar Sons, ;

Petitioner Advocate

N.B.Adwani;

Respondent Name

Ms.Banka India Ltd And Other;

Respondent Advocate

Bhoir;

Order Details

Order not found.

Final Order Judgement

Order Date

25-08-2011

Filed on : 06/10/2000 Registered on : 06/10/2000 Decided on : 25/08/2011 Duration : 10 10 19 Y M D IN THE COURT OF JT.CIVIL JUDGE SENIOR DIVISION, KALYAN, AT KALYAN (Presided over by S.R.Kafre) Summary Suit No.11/2000 Exh. No. M/s.Parlikar & Sons, A registered Partnership Firm, Through its Partner, Shri.Sachin Avinash Parlikar, aged about 25 years, Office : Murbad road, Subhash Chowk, Kalyan (West). ... Plaintiff Vs 1. M/s Banka India Ltd., 2. Mr.Anil Banka, Unit No.15/16, Sanjay No.3, Mittal Estate, Marol, Mumbai – 400 059. ... Defendants Suit for recovery of amount of Rs.2,90,000/....... Learned counsel Shri.Ashok N Adwani for the plaintiff Defendants without defence. 1] This is a suit for recovery of principal amount of Rs. 2,00,000/ plus Rs.90,000/ interest thereon. Relevant facts of the suit are as under : 2] The plaintiff is the registered partnership firm and stockist of Gujrat Ambuja Cement Ltd., The plaintiff and the defendant had business relations. The plaintiff had supplied cement to the defendants as per the order placed by them. Details of the supply of the cement to the defendants are set out as under Date Bill No. Amount in Rupees 12/1/1998 9235 82,800/ 15/1/1998 9284 55,200/ 16/1/1998 9307 82,800/ 27/1/1998 9446 55,200/ 28/1/1998 9456 82,800/ 30/1/1998 9499 82,800/ 4/2/1998 9605 55,200/ 7/2/1998 9643 27,600/ 10/2/1998 9714 55,200/ 12/2/1998 9743 55,200/ 13/2/1998 9780 27,600/ 14/2/1998 9799 82,800/ 18/2/1998 9845 82,800/ 19/2/1998 9846 27,600/ 21/2/1998 9911 55,200/ 26/2/1998 10012 82,800/ 27/2/1998 10030 27,600/ 02/3/1998 10076 55,200/ 10/3/1998 10239 13,800/ 3] The plaintiff has submitted that the defendants had issued cheques to make the payment of purchased cement. According to plaintiff following cheques are dishonoured. Sr.No. Cheque No. Date 01 275530 6/4/1998 02 275531 6/4/1998 03 275532 6/4/1998 04 275533 6/4/1998 4] The plaintiff has approached to the defendants for the recovery of cheque amount but defendants did not pay any heed on the request of plaintiff. The plaintiff has issued demand notice dt.9/9/1999 demanding the outstanding amount for the supply of cement. Despite of receipt of notice, the defendant failed to make the payment of due amount. Hence, the plaintiff has filed this suit for recovery of an amount of Rs. 2,00,000 with interest @ of 18 % p.a. and according to the plaintiff, till the filing of this suit, the amount was of Rs.90,000/ due towards the interest. 5] The defendants were granted conditional leave to defend subject to payment of Rs.1,00,000/. However, the defendants have failed to comply with the conditions, therefore, this suit has been proceeded without the defense of the defendants. 6] From the facts and circumstances of the case, following points arise for my determination, and, I record my findings thereon against each of them as under for the reasons stated below. Sr.No. POINTS FINDINGS 1. Whether plaintiff is entitled to recover an amount of Rs.2,00,000/ with interest ? In the affirmative. 2. What order and decree ? As per final order. AS TO POINT NO.1 : 7] In order to establish its claim, the plaintiff firm has examined its partner namely Shri.Sachin Avinash Parlikar at Exh.31 as P.W.No.1, Shri.Abdul Sattar, Chief Manager as P.W.No.2 at Exh.63 and Manager of Bank of India, Kalyan Smt.Naina Chandrakant Kamble at Exh.66. I have heard Learned counsel Shri.Ashok Adwani for the plaintiff. 8] Partner of the plaintiff firm has stated all the facts in his affidavit narrated in the plaint. He has stated that plaintiff has supplied cement to the defendants. But, four cheques issued by defendants were dishonoured though notice was issued by the plaintiff, they failed to make payment of due amount. 9] The plaintiff was granted permission to lead secondary evidence. Accordingly, it has led secondary evidence in respect of dishonoured cheques. Plaintiff has filed dishonoured cheques at Exh.67 to 73 and office copy of notice at Exh.74, P.W.No.3 Naina Kamble has stated that the plaintiff has maintained its account in Bank of India, Kalyan (West) During the period from 5/4/1999 to 6/4/1999 seven cheques were presented for encashment, however, those cheques were returned unpaid due to the insufficient funds in the accounts of the defendants maintained with Syndicate Bank, Vileparle. P.W.No.2 Shri.Abdul Sattar, Chief Manager, Syndicate Bank has stated that it was not possible for him to produce document showing that the account of defendants was closed. He has further stated that in case of return of cheque, the record was being preserved only for three years. According to this witness as per the policy of bank, the original record shall be preserved only for 8 years, thereafter that record has to be destroyed. In such circumstances, it is necessary to rely on the secondary evidence given by the plaintiff. 10] The plaintiff has placed on record in all 7 chques at Exh.67 to 73. However, in the plaint, the plaintiff has made mention of only four cheques viz cheque No.275530, dt.6/4/98 amounting to Rs.69,000, cheque No.275531 dt.6/4/1998 amounting to Rs.27,600/, cheque No.275532 dt. 6/4/1998 amounting to Rs.82,800/ and cheque No.275533 dt.6/4/1998 amounting to Rs.55,200/. Total amount of those dishonoured cheque is Rs.2,34,600/. However, the plaintiff has claimed principal amount of Rs. 2,00,000/ in this suit. The defendants were given opportunity to contest the claim of the plaintiff, however, they failed to comply with the conditions imposed by this court while granting leave to defend and therefore, the suit proceeded without defense. There is no reason to disbelieve the evidence adduced by the plaintiff. Therefore, it can safely be stated that the defendants have committed default in payment of Rs. 2,00,000/ to the plaintiff. The plaintiff is entitled to recover an amount of Rs.2,00,000/ from the defendants. 11] The plaintiff has not placed on record any document showing that there was any agreement between it and defendants in respect of charging of interest if, the defendants commit default in payment of the due amount. However, the plaintiff is entitled to recover an amount of Rs. 2,00,000/ with reasonable interest from the date of the suit till the realization of the entire amount. In my opinion, there was commercial transaction between the plaintiff and defendants, therefore, charging of interest @ the of 12 % p.a. from the date of suit till realization would meet the ends of justice. Hence, I answer point No.1 in the affirmative. AS TO POINT No.2 : 12] In view of my foregoing discussions, I come to the conclusion that, the suit deserves to be decreed with cost. In the result, I proceed to pass following order. O R D E R 1. The suit is decreed with cost. 2. The defendants do pay an amount of Rs.2,00,000/ to the plaintiff with interest at the rate of 12 % p.a. from the date of suit till the realisation of the entire amount. 3. Court fees be refunded to the plaintiff as per rules. 4. Decree be drawn up accordingly. Kalyan. (S.R.Kafre) Date : 25/08/2011. Jt. Civil Judge,S.D., Kalyan. src pc

Similar Cases

Frequently Asked Questions

The Petitioner in case Ms.Parlikar Sons vs Ms.Banka India Ltd And 1 Other is Ms.Parlikar Sons.

The Respondent in case Ms.Parlikar Sons vs Ms.Banka India Ltd And 1 Other is Ms.Banka India Ltd And 1 Other.

The case against Ms.Banka India Ltd And 1 Otherwas filed on 06-10-2000 by Ms.Parlikar Sons.

The status of case Ms.Parlikar Sons against Ms.Banka India Ltd And 1 Other is Case Disposed.