Delhi District Court
Atsa Techno Chem And Systems vs Sil Autofab Limited on 9 July, 2024
1
IN THE COURT OF SH. BHUPESH KUMAR: DISTRICT JUDGE
(COMMERCIAL COURTS)-05, SOUTH EAST DISTRICT, SAKET
COURTS, NEW DELHI
CS (Comm) No. 397/2023
ATSA Techno Chem and Systems
Through its proprietor Sh. Atul Kumar Gupta,
Plot No. 200, GF, Block E-III, Badarpur,
New Delhi-110044. ... Plaintiff
Versus
SIL Autofab Limited
Through its Directors,
Office at; - B-1/E 3, First Floor,
Mohan Co-operative Industrial Area,
Mathura Road, Delhi-110044.
Also at
SIL Autofab Limited - (Unit-III)
B-15 & C-18, UPSIDC Industrial Area,
Kosi Kalan, Mathura-281403,
Also at:
97, Eastern Avenue, Near Ram Mandir, Sainik Farm Delhi.
Email: [email protected]
....Defendant
Date of Institution : 01.05.2023
Date of Arguments : 04.07.2024
Date of Judgment : 09.07.2024
JUDGMENT
1. The present suit has been filed by the plaintiff firm i.e. ATSA Techno Chem and Systems against the defendant company i.e., SIL Autofab Limited, seeking decree of recovery of Rs. 19,41,345/- alongwith pendente- lite and future interest @ 18 % per annum.
CS (Comm)397/2023 Bhupesh Kumar District Judge(Commercial)-05, Saket Courts, South East/09.07.2024 2
2. The brief facts of the matter as emerged from the plaint are that defendant company has approached the plaintiff for supply of chemical products such as INDOFIL ESVS, INDOFIL KST, INDOFIL KST PLUS. It has been further submitted that the material was supplied by the plaintiff to the defendant against PO at SIL Autofab Limited- (Unit-III) B-15 & C-18, UPSIDC Industrial Area, Kosi Kalan, Mathura-281403 during the year 2017 to 2021. It has been further submitted that plaintiff used to raise invoices/bills upon the defendant from time to time. It has been further submitted that as per the ledger account of the defendant maintained by the plaintiff in the normal course of business a sum of Rs. 19,41,345/- is outstanding therein. It has been further submitted that the plaintiff has requested the defendant to make the payment of outstanding amount but was of no avail and ultimately legal notice was issued to the defendant in the month of November, 2022 but despite issuance of legal notice, the due amount was not paid.
Inter alia, On the basis of these submissions, prayer has been made decree the suit.
3. The summons of the suit were issued to defendant but defendant refused to accept the summons on 08.09.2023, which amounts to valid service. Defendant has not filed the written statement within statutory period and the opportunity granted to defendant to file the written statement was closed by order and the defense of the defendant struck off.
4. The plaintiff has examined one witness in support of his case. Sh. Atul Kumar Gupta, proprietor of plaintiff firm appeared in witness box as PW-1 and led his evidence by way of affidavit ExPW1/A, wherein, he has deposed on the similar lines to that of the plaint. He has relied upon the CS (Comm)397/2023 Bhupesh Kumar District Judge(Commercial)-05, Saket Courts, South East/09.07.2024 3 invoices raised during financial year 2017-18, 2018-19 & 2019-20, E-way bills & transportation documents (consignment notes) as Ex.PW1/1, Ledger account of defendant maintained by the plaintiff as Ex.PW1/2, Certificate under Section 65B of Indian Evidence Act towards the computer output as Ex.PW1/3, legal notice and postal receipts and returned envelope is Ex.PW1/4.
This witness was not cross-examined on behalf of defendant as none appeared on behalf of defendant on the day of recording evidence of this witness. Moreover, the right of defendant to file written statement was closed and defense of defendant struck of vide order dated 17.11.2023. PE was closed.
5. I have heard the arguments of Sh. Abhinay Gupta, Ld. Counsel for plaintiff besides going through the material available on record.
6. Heard. Material perused.
7. From perusal of invoices , e-way bills part of Ex.PW1/1 brought on record by PW-1, it is found that material was supplied to the defendant. Further from perusal of the ledger account Ex.PW1/2, it is found that last payment was made by the defendant on 20.10.2020 of sum of Rs.10,000/- and as on the same day Rs.19,41,345/- was due and payable by defendant. The present suit was filed by the plaintiff firm on 01.05.2023 i.e., within the period of limitation. The witness was not cross-examined, hence, the evidence of plaintiff's witness on all these important aspects remain un- controverted. No justified ground is found to doubt the testimony of this CS (Comm)397/2023 Bhupesh Kumar District Judge(Commercial)-05, Saket Courts, South East/09.07.2024 4 witness in this regard. There is no legal impediment to deny the claim of the plaintiff.
8. In the light of above discussions, it is found that plaintiff is entitled for a decree of sum of Rs. 19,41,345-. The plaintiff has claimed the interest @ 18% per annum, which is found to be on higher side. Considering the entire facts and circumstances, it is found that the interest @ 12% per annum would be sufficient to meet the ends of justice.
9. Considering the entire facts and circumstances and evidence on record, a decree of a sum of Rs. 19,41,345/- passed in favour of the plaintiff firm i.e. ATSA Techno Chem and Systems and against the defendant company i.e., SIL Autofab Limited, along with interest @ of 12% per annum from date of filing of the suit till its realization along with with cost of Rs. 30,000/- which includes court fee, legal fee and other expenses incurred by the plaintiff in the present suit (here it is made clear that plaintiff shall not claim any interest on the cost).
Decree sheet be prepared accordingly.
File be consigned to Record Room after due compliance.
Digitally signed by
BHUPESH BHUPESH KUMAR
Dictated and announced KUMAR Date: 2024.07.09
on 09th July, 2024. 14:37:43 +0530
(Bhupesh Kumar)
District Judge (Commercial)-05
South-East District, Saket Courts, New Delhi
CS (Comm)397/2023 Bhupesh Kumar
District Judge(Commercial)-05, Saket Courts, South East/09.07.2024