Bangalore District Court
M/S Matrix Cellular (International) vs Vijayamahantesh Barigidad on 20 January, 2016
Before the Court of XII Additional Small Causes at
Bangalore
(SCCH-8)
Present: Shri P.J. Somashekar B.A., LL.B.
XII Additional Small Causes Judge,
Bangalore.
Dated this the 20th day of January 2016
S.C.No.1262/2015
Plaintiff M/s Matrix Cellular (International)
Services Private Limited, a company
registered under the Companies Act,
1956 and having its Branch Office at
No.95, 17th B Main Road,
Koramangala, Bengaluru-560 095.
Represented by its Executive,
Shri Nazeer,
(Shri Kashyap N.Naik, Advocate)
V/s.
Defendant Vijayamahantesh Barigidad,
Son Sanganna Mahantappa
Barigidad,
Residing at Ward No.3,
Opp. Narayan Talkies, Ilkal Post,
Bagalkot, Karnataka.
(Shri Anand Kumar, Advocate)
Date of institution of the suit: 28.10.2015
Nature of the suit (suit on pronote,
suit for declaration and possession
suit for injunction etc.): Recovery of money
2 SCCH-8 SC 1262/2015
Date of commencement of
recording of the evidence: 18.1.2016
Date on which the judgment
is pronounced : 20.1.2016
Total duration: Years Month/s Days
0 1 20
XII Addl.Judge
JUDGMENT
This is a suit filed by the plaintiff company against the defendant for recovery of money of Rs.13,365/- with future interest at 18% p.a. from the date of suit till its realisation.
2. The brief facts of the plaint are as under:
The plaintiff company carrying its business of International Mobile Connections in the name and style of Matrix Cellular (International) Services in its plaint has alleged that the defendant had applied for International Mobile Connection in Bengaluru and procured the 3 SCCH-8 SC 1262/2015 Standard application form containing the terms and conditions regarding the usage of the said connection. After being satisfied about the terms and conditions the defendant has agreed to hire a mobile connection and categorically stated that he has read and understood the terms and conditions of the agreement form and agreed to abide by the said conditions. Thereafter, several bills were raised on the basis of the defendant's usage. Inspite of several requests and demands, the defendant has failed to pay a sum of Rs.13,365/- though he has agreed to clear all the dues charged for the rental/usage of the mobile connection under the said agreement.
3.The plaintiff company in its plaint further alleged that he has got issued a legal notice dated 15.3.2013 and the said notice was duly served on the defendant calling upon him for payment of the due amount with interest at the rate of 18% p.a. The defendant has not chosen to reply the said notice nor complied the demand of the plaintiff company. The defendant is obligated for the 4 SCCH-8 SC 1262/2015 services rendered by the plaintiff company. Thereby the plaintiff company has constrained to file the instant suit against the defendant.
4. The cause of action for the suit which arose on 5.5.2012 when the defendant has entered into the agreement for providing international mobile connection and the defendant has become due and failed to pay the bills and on 15.3.2013 on which date the legal notice was got issued within the jurisdiction of this court and prays for decree the suit.
5. In response of the suit summons, the defendant has appeared through his counsel, but failed to file the written statement. So, the written statement of the defendant taken as not filed.
6. The plaintiff company in order to prove the plaint averments has examined its Authorised Signatory, as P.W.1 and got marked the documents as Ex.P1 to P7 and plaintiff company has not examined any witness in its favour.
5 SCCH-8 SC 1262/2015
7. Heard the arguments on plaintiff's side.
8. The points that arise for court consideration are as under:
1) Whether the plaintiff company is entitled for the relief as prayed for?
2) What order or decree?
9. My answer to the above points are as under:
Point No.1: In the affirmative.
Point No.2: As per final order
for the following:
REASONS
10. Point No.1:
The plaintiff company has approached the court on the ground that the plaintiff company carrying its business of International Mobile Connections in the name and style of Matrix Cellular (International) Services Private Limited and the defendant had applied for international mobile connection in Bengaluru and procured the Standard application form containing the 6 SCCH-8 SC 1262/2015 terms and conditions regarding the usage of the said connection and the defendant has agreed to hire the mobile connection and signed the agreement and though he has utilised the usage of the said mobile connection, but he did not pay Rs.13,365/- inspite of repeated requests and demands made by the company. So, the defendant is due a sum of Rs.13,365/- with interest at the rate of 18% p.a. Thereby, the plaintiff company has filed the instant suit against the defendant.
11. The plaintiff company in order to prove the plaint averments has examined its Authorised Signatory as PW1. The PW1 has filed his affidavit as his chief- examination in which has stated that the plaintiff company carrying its business of International Mobile Connections in the name and style of Matrixz Celular (International) Services Private Limited and the defendant had applied for International Mobile Connection in Bengaluru and procured the Standard application form containing the terms and conditions regarding the usage 7 SCCH-8 SC 1262/2015 of the said connection. After being satisfied about the terms and conditions the defendant has agreed to hire a mobile connection and signed the statement after read over the terms and conditions of the agreement form. Though the defendant has utilised the said mobile connection and due for Rs.13,365/-. But inspite of several requests and demands did not pay the due amount. The plaintiff company got issued a legal notice to the defendant calling upon him for payment of the said due amount, but inspite of notice did not pay the same. So, the defendant is liable to pay a due amount of Rs.13,365/- and he is also liable to pay interest at the rate of 18%.p.a. The summons was served on the defendant, but inspite of appearance did not file the written statement, thus written statement of the defendant taken as not filed.
12. The plaintiff company in support of the oral evidence has produced the documents marked as Ex.P1 to Ex.P7. So Ex.P1 and Ex.P2 are clear that the 8 SCCH-8 SC 1262/2015 defendant has applied for international mobile connection and executed the agreement by accepting the terms and conditions of the plaintiff company. Ex.P3 to Ex.P5 are reflects that the defendant's usage of the said mobile connection and due for Rs.13,365/-. Ex.P6 & Ex.P7 are reflects that the plaintiff company has got issued a legal notice to the defendant to calling upon him for payment of the due amount, but the defendant did not pay the due amount. Thereby, the plaintiff has filed the instant suit against the defendant. If at all, the defendant has not utilised the mobile connection from the plaintiff company he would have resisted the claim of the plaintiff company. Though he has appeared but failed to file the written statement. That itself is clear that the defendant had applied for international mobile connection in Bengaluru and procured the standard customer agreement form containing the terms and conditions regarding the usage of the said connection, after being satisfied by the terms and conditions has 9 SCCH-8 SC 1262/2015 signed the form and used the mobile connection and he has due for Rs.13,365/-. So, considering the transaction in between the plaintiff company and the defendant, it is just and necessary to grant interest at the rate of 16% p.a. instead of 18% it will meet the ends of justice. The plaintiff company has proved its case through oral and documentary evidence that the defendant has took the international mobile connection though he has used the mobile connection, but he did not pay the amount of Rs.13,365/- inspite of repeated requests and demands made by the plaintiff and the defendant is due a sum of Rs.13,365/- with interest. Hence, I am of the opinion that the point No.1 is in the Affirmative.
13. Point No.2:
In view of my answer to the point No.1, I proceed to pass the following:
ORDER The suit of the plaintiff company is decreed with costs.10 SCCH-8 SC 1262/2015
The defendant is hereby directed to pay the decreetal amount of Rs.13,365/- with interest at the rate of 16% p.a. to the plaintiff company from the date of suit till its realization.
Draw decree accordingly. Dictated to the stenographer, transcript thereof, corrected by me and then pronounced in the open court on this the 20th day of January 2016.
(P.J.Somashekar), XII Addl. Small Causes Judge, Bangalore.
ANNEXURE List of the witnesses examined on behalf of plaintiffs:
PW1 Sri Nazeer 18.1.2016 List of the documents exhibited on behalf of plaintiffs:
Ex.P1 Board Resolution copy
Ex.P2 Customer Agreement form
Ex.P3 Bill copy
Ex.P4 Copy
Ex.P5 Account extract
Ex.P6 Notice copy
11 SCCH-8 SC 1262/2015
Ex.P7 Postal receipt
List of the witnesses examined on behalf of defendants:
None List of the documents marked on behalf of defendants:
Nil (P.J. Somashekar), XII Addl. Small Causes Judge, Bangalore.