Bangalore District Court
M/S. Dtdc Courier And Cargo Ltd vs M/S Aleena Enterprises on 18 April, 2015
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 18th day of April 2015
S.C.No.1427/2014
Plaintiff M/s. DTDC Courier and Cargo Ltd.,
DTDC House No.269, Albert Victor Road,1st
Main, Chamrajpet, Bangalore-560 018.
Represented by its Zonal Admin Manager
and Regional HR Manager,
Mr.T.S.Ramamurthy.
(Shri Dileep.N, Advocate)
V/s.
Defendant M/s Aleena Enterprises,
(Franchise Code No.OF762)
Office at K.V.K. Kutty Building,
Cross Road, Nadakkave,
Calicut District,
Represented by its Proprietor
K.F.Siji, Aged about 35 years,
Wife of Vipin John.
And also
K.F.Siji,
Wife of Vipin John,
Bathel Vellurthazham,
Civil Station,
Calicut-673 011.
(Exparte)
Date of institution of the suit: 17.12.2014
Nature of the suit (suit on pronote,
suit for declaration and possession
suit for injunction etc.): Recovery of money
Date of commencement of
recording of the evidence: 16.4.2015
2 (SCCH-8) SC 1427/2014
Date on which the judgment
is pronounced : 18.03.2015
Total duration: Years Month/s Days
0 3 1
XII Addl.Judge
JUDGMENT
This is a suit filed by the plaintiff against the defendant for recovery of money of Rs.69,987/- with interest at the rate of 12% from the date of the suit till its realization.
2. The brief facts of the plaint are as under:
The plaintiff being the Company is registered under the Companies Act 1956 under the name and style of DTDC Courier & Cargo Ltd having its registered and regional offices at Bangalore. Since from two decades the Company has been rendering and fulfilling the needs of its customers, ranging from individuals to group of companies, in the filed of Courier and carriage of Cargo. So, upon the request of the defendant franchise ship was given to the defendant on 23.8.2012, after granting franchise-ship to the defendant, the defendant has been carrying out the business under the name and style of M/s. Aleena Enterprises, at Calicut District. The defendant as a franchisee had availed the services for
3 (SCCH-8) SC 1427/2014 the Plaintiff Company for transshipment of consignments to various places and destinations booked by the defendant on behalf of the Plaintiff Company. As per the franchisee agreement, the defendant ought to have made the transshipment charges/service charges/payments to the Plaintiff Company on or before 7th of every month for the services rendered by the Plaintiff Company for the preceding month. When the defendant failed to make the payment for the services rendered by the Plaintiff Company and the defendant has been surmounted to the tune of Rs.69,987/- as on 23.09.2013.
3. The Plaintiff Company in its plaint has further alleged that when the dues remained unpaid by the defendant, it has requested the defendant to clear the dues without further delay in order to avoid any legal consequences to be implemented. But, the defendant did not response properly to the oral requests made by the Plaintiff Company and the defendant has also stopped branch activities abruptly and due to which Plaintiff Company underwent huge hardship as their customers' consignments were held up in the office of the defendant without delivering the same within the time frame fixed by the Plaintiff Company. The defendant has neither completed the closure formalities nor cleared the total outstanding amount of Rupees 69,987/- to their company without there being any valid reason the defendant had retained a sum of 4 (SCCH-8) SC 1427/2014 Rs.69,987/- since from past several months. So, the defendant is represented by sole proprietor is directed to pay a sum of Rs.69,987/- together with interest at the rate of 12% p.a., but, failed to pay the same. So, the cause of action for the suit which arose on 23.8.20112 when the defendant was given franchisee- ship of the Plaintiff Company and when the defendant failed to make the transshipment charges as per the statement of account generated every month till 23.09.2013 and on all subsequent events and prays for decree the suit.
4. In response of the suit summons, the defendant did not appear nor file his written statement as he was placed ex-parte.
5. The Plaintiff Company in order to prove the plaint averments has examined the Company Representing Zonal Manager and Regional HR Manager as P.W.1 and got marked the documents as Ex.P1 to P4 and Plaintiff Company has not examined any witness in its favor.
6. Heard the arguments on plaintiff's side.
7. The points that arise for court consideration are as under:
1) Whether the plaintiff is entitled for the relief as prayed for?
2) What order or decree?
8. My answer to the above points are as under:
Point No.1: In the affirmative.
5 (SCCH-8) SC 1427/2014 Point No.2: As per final order for the following:
REASONS
9. Point No.1:
The Plaintiff Company has approached this court on the ground that the defendant has entered with the Plaintiff Company a franchise-ship by virtue of that, the defendant ought to have made the transshipment charges/services charges/payments to the Plaintiff Company on or before 7th of every month for the services rendered by the Plaintiff Company for the preceding month. By virtue of franchise-ship, the defendant has been carrying out the business under the name and style of M/s.Aleena Enterprises and the defendant has availed the services of Plaintiff Company for transshipment of consignments to various places and destinations booked by the defendant on behalf of the Plaintiff Company. But, the defendant has not paid the charges as per the agreement. The defendant is due a sum of Rs.69,987/-. Inspite of the requests the defendant has not paid the said amount. Thereby the Plaintiff Company has filed the suit against the defendant.
10. The Plaintiff Company in order to prove the plaint averments has examined its Zonal Manager and Regional HR Manager as P.W.1. The P.W.1 has filed his affidavit as his chief examination in which he has stated that, the Plaintiff Company is the core activity of the Courier and carriage of Cargo and the 6 (SCCH-8) SC 1427/2014 defendant has approached the Plaintiff Company and sought for franchise of the Plaintiff Company. Upon the request of the defendant a franchise-ship was given to him on 10.10.2011. The defendant has been carrying out the business under the name and style of M/s. Aleena Enterprises. The defendant as per the franchise agreement ought to have made the transshipment charges to the Plaintiff Company on or before 7th of every month. Though the defendant has booked the services from the Plaintiff Company has not paid amount of Rs.69,987/-. Thereby the plaintiff has got issued legal notice calling upon the defendant for payment of outstanding due to the tune of Rs.69,987/-. But, he did not pay the said amount. Thereby the Plaintiff Company has filed the suit against the defendant.
11. The Plaintiff Company in support of the oral evidence has produced the documents marked as Ex.P1 to Ex.P4. Ex.P1 to Ex.P.4 are clearly reflects about the agreement which was taken place in between the Plaintiff Company and the defendant and by virtue of that agreement, the defendant has took the services from the company. But, he did not pay the charges for that he is due for a sum of Rs.69,987/-. If at all the defendant has not availed the services from the Plaintiff Company he would have appeared in response of the suit summons and resisted the suit of the plaintiff Company. But, the reasons best known to the defendant inspite of 7 (SCCH-8) SC 1427/2014 service of summons did not appear nor resisted the claim of the plaintiff company. So, the oral and documentary evidence on record clearly reflects that the defendant by virtue of the agreement has booked the services from the Plaintiff Company but, he did not pay an amount of Rs.69,987/- relating to the service charges, that, is the reason why the Plaintiff Company has filed the instant suit against the defendant. The Plaintiff Company has proved its case through oral and documentary evidence that, the defendant by virtue of agreement has availed the services from the Plaintiff Company but, he did not pay the charges of Rs.69,987/- and the transaction in between the plaintiff and the defendant is a commercial transaction. Therefore, the defendant is liable to pay interest at the rate of 12% per annum from the date of suit till its realization. Hence, I am of the opinion that Point No.1 is answered in the Affirmative.
12. 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 is decreed with costs. The defendant is hereby directed to pay a sum of Rs.69,987/- with interest at the rate of 12% p.a. to the plaintiff from the date of suit till its realisation. 8 (SCCH-8) SC 1427/2014 Draw decree accordingly.
Dictated to the stenographer, transcript thereof, corrected by me and then pronounced in the open court this the 18th day of April 2015.
(P.J.Somashekar), XII Addl. Small Causes Judge, Bangalore.
ANNEXURE List of the witnesses examined on behalf of plaintiffs:
PW1 Mr. Ramamurthy M.S. 10.03.2015 List of the documents exhibited on behalf of plaintiffs:
Ex.P1 Statement of Accounts
Ex.P2 Agreement
Ex.P3 Letter of Certificate of Incorporation
Ex.P4 Letter of Authority
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.