Bangalore District Court
M/S Span Healthcare Pvt vs M/S Ncord Biotec Ltd on 24 September, 2018
Form No.9
(Civil) Title
Sheet for
Judgment
in Suits
R.P. 91
PRESENT: SMT.. PRASHANTHI.G
B.A. (Law.,) LL.B.,
XXVII Additional City Civil Judge and
Sessions Judge,
Dated this the 24th day of September 2018
PLAINTIFF: M/s SPAN HEALTHCARE PVT.
LTD. Columbus Business
Chambers, # 17, 7th Temple
Street, 15th Cross, Malleshwaram,
Bangalore-560 003.
Represented by its Head-Finance
Mr. Ravikumar N.B.
[By Sri Santhosh. H.R. Advocate]
/v e r s u s/
DEFENDANTS: 1. M/s NCORD BIOTEC LTD.
1073, Model Colony,
Shivajinagar, Pune,
Maharashtra-411 016.
Represened by its Director,
Chandrashekar Khanderao,
Valavankar.
2. MR. PRAKASH DAMODAR
LOHARKAR, Director,
M/s NCORD BIOTEC Ltd.,
R/o Flat No.504, Floor No.5,
Vaidhai Enclave, Pashan Road,
Near Vidnayan Nagar,
2 CT0028_O.S._981_2016_Judgment_.doc
.
Bhavadhan, Pune, Maharashtra-411 021.
3. MR. NEELESH KANADE, Chairman, M/ NCORD BIOTEC Ltd., No.1073, Ghoshle Road, Model Colony, Pune-411 016.
Maharashtra, India.
4. MRS. RUPA NEELESH KANADE, Director, M/s NCORD BIOTEC Ltd., No.1073, Ghoshle Road, Model Colony, Pune-411 016.
Maharashtra, India.
6. Dr. REHKA GARG Project Manager, M/s NCORD BIOTEC Ltd., Having her offices at 1073, Model Colony, Shivajinagar, Pune, Maharashtra-411 016.
[Exparte] Date of institution of the : 02/2/2016 suit Nature of the suit : For recovery of money Date of commencement of : 30/8/2017 recording of the evidence Date on which the : 22/09/2018 Judgment was pronounced.
: Year/s Month/s Day/s
Total duration
2 7 22
(PRASHANTHI.G)
XXVII ACCJ: B'LORE.
3 CT0028_O.S._981_2016_Judgment_.doc
.
The plaintiff has filed this suit for the relief of recovery of money directing the defendants to jointly and severally pay the plaintiff company the outstanding invoice amount to the tune of Rs.18,59,003/- (Rupees Eighteen Lakhs Fifty Nine thousand and three only) with interest at 18% per annum from the date of the invoices till the date of realization, and directing the defendants to pay damages to the extent of Rs.5,00,000/- (Rupees Five lakhs) for the loss and difficulties suffered by the plaintiff company due to the degenerate and fraudulent acts by the defendants and for their breach of contract.
2. In brief, the plaintiff's case is as under:
The plaintiff is company engaged in the business of providing specialized high-end medical equipments dealing with stem cell therapy in India. The registered company is situated in Bangalore and that handle the 4 CT0028_O.S._981_2016_Judgment_.doc .
collection, separation, screening and storage of blood and blood components in Bangalore. The defendant is a company, engaged in business of providing health care services such as bone marrow registry, cord blood banking, stem cell research and therapies and specialized research in the same. In the course of the business, the defendant No.1 purchased various products and technologies such as one developed and supplied by the plaintiff company. The defendant No. 2 to 4 are the Directors of the defendant No.1 company are responsible for the day-to-day functions, transactions of the company. The defendant No.5 is the product manger and acted on behalf of defendant No.1 company, in all its transactions.
3. In the year 2012, since the defendant No.1 was in need of various products and technologies approached the plaintiff company for the supply of some products. On the other hand the defendant No.1 company represented that, it would make prompt payments for the products and relying on the above 5 CT0028_O.S._981_2016_Judgment_.doc .
issuance, the plaintiff company communicated its willingness to supply the products to Defendant No.1. Accordingly, Defendant No. 1 issued 2 purchase orders dtd.12.03.2012 and 22.06.2012 for the products at the stipulated prices. It is admitted that, product No.1 was signed by the defendant No.2 and bears the seal of the company. Similarly Product No.2 bears signature of defendant no.2 and defendant No.5 and is on the letter head of defendant No1 company. The defendant No.1 agreed to pay Rs. 36,42,141/- only towards that total consideration for the above products. The Defendant no.1 was to make part payments towards the total consideration as and when it received the products invoices for the same. However, upon issuing the product orders defendant No.5 communicated to the plaintiff company that, defendant No.1 company had misstaked in specifying the quantity of the product No. 9 in the above table. As per the Product order No.1 the quantity of product No.9 is required as 8. As per the E-mail only 4 items 6 CT0028_O.S._981_2016_Judgment_.doc .
were delivered. So the plaintiff company agreed and undertook to supply 4 more items as stipulated in the E-Mail. The Plaintiff executed the Product orders in an expeditious manner and the products were supplied on stipulated dates. The defendant No.1 accepted the products and certified that, they received the same in good and working condition. The details of the deliveries and invoices raised are described in the plaint. The defendant no.1 company made part payment towards the total consideration due from it for the product to a cumulative sum of Rs.14,42,141/- only in the following manner:-
a. Rs. 7,50,000/- vide cheque No. 551893 dated 29.03.2012 b. Rs. 54,150/-vide Cheque No. 610799 dated. 02.07.2012 c. Rs. 3,37,991/- vide RTGS on 12.08.20104.
d. Rs. 3,00,000/- vide RTGS on
17.10.2014.
7 CT0028_O.S._981_2016_Judgment_.doc
.
4. The balance consideration payable from
defendant No. 1 to the plaintiff company is Rs.
22,00,000/- only.
5. The plaintiff company made repeated demands to defendant No.1 to clear its dues and invoices. However, the defendant No.1 did not clear the payments and continue to take possession of the products as and when they were delivered to it. Therefore, due to the failure of defendant No.1 plaintiff company was left with no option but to suspect the delivery of the products.
6. Without agreeing upon the payment of products which are delivered to it, the defendant No.1 communicated the plaintiff company that one of the product was delivered in a damaged condition. Further, there is change in quantity of items supplied to the defendant company by the plaintiff company.
7. In order to maintain a healthy relationship with the defendant No.1 and to amicably complete the transaction repeatedly plaintiff asked the defendant 8 CT0028_O.S._981_2016_Judgment_.doc .
company to make the payment also pay all the amount which are due to him. In this regard a copy of preliminary notice dated.15.06.2015 issued to defendant No.1 to repay the amount and to make the payment to the plaintiff . However, the defendant company ignore the above notice and has till the date of this suit tendered no response. The plaintiff company was under the impression that as a respectful enterprise the defendant will certainly make the payments and also invoices. However, now the plaintiff understood that the behavior of the defendant No.1 is to induce the plaintiff company to contract with it and take delivery of the products without making any contractual payments.
8. As per the pleadings the defendant No.1 had made no more than a nominal payment towards the considerable value of the products. It is pertinent to note that defendant No.1 has raised objections with respect to two of products supplied by plaintiff company. All the attempts to settle the disputes in the 9 CT0028_O.S._981_2016_Judgment_.doc .
amicable manner became in vain. So the plaintiff has filed this suit for the necessary relief. All the documents such as details of products, prices, invoices and the e-mail sent by the defendant company are produced before the court.
9. In response to suit summons issued by the Court, defendants did not appear and contest the case of the plaintiff. Hence, they are placed as exparte.
10. The plaintiff company in order to prove its case has got examined its authorized representative as PW.1 and produced in all 11 documents which are marked as Ex.P1 to Ex.P11 and closed his side of evidence.
11. Heard the arguments for the plaintiff and perused the entire records of the case.
12. The points those arise for my consideration are as under:
(1) Whether the plaintiff proves that the defendants No.1 to 5 are jointly and severally liable 10 CT0028_O.S._981_2016_Judgment_.doc .
to pay the plaintiff company the outstanding invoice amount to the tune of Rs. 18,59,003/-
with interest @ 18 % p.a?
(2) Whether the plaintiff proves that they were entitle to the damages to the tune of Rs.
5,00,000/- from the
defendants?
(3) What order or decree?
13. My findings on the above points are as under:
Point No. 1) ............ Affirmative Point No. 2) ............ Affirmative Point No. 3) ............ As per final order for the following:
13. POINTS NO.1: It is already stated that, the suit of the plaintiff is one for recovery of the money on the basis of the products supplied by the plaintiff company towards the defendant No. 1 to 5. The relief claimed in the plaint is to direct the defendant 11 CT0028_O.S._981_2016_Judgment_.doc .
to jointly and severally pay the plaintiff company the outstanding invoice amount to the tune of Rs. 18,59,003/- with the interest at the rate 18 % P.A from the date of invoices till the date of realization. The plaintiff also sought for the damages from the defendant to an extent of Rs. 5,00,000/- for the losses and sufferings suffered by the plaintiff company due to degenerate and fraudulent act of the defendant . In the pleadings it is specifically stated that, the defendant No. 1 to 5 are the regular customers of plaintiff company purchasing the products as well as invoices for the considerable value. The list of all the products as well as invoices are explained in the plaint in detail. To support this pleadings the plaintiff himself examined as PW.1 and marked the documents as Ex.P 1 to Ex.P11. There is no scope for disbelieving the version of the plaintiff. Moreover the defendants did not appear before the court in order to contradict the versions of the plaintiff. On the 12 CT0028_O.S._981_2016_Judgment_.doc .
basis of the pleadings, evidence, and also on the basis of arguments adduced by the counsel for the plaintiff I am of the opinion that the defendant company has to make the payment of Rs. 18,59,003/- from the date of invoice till the date of realization.
15. POINT NO.2: From the above discussions it is very clear that the defendants as agreed, did not keep up their promise for payment as well as interest in the day-to-day business. Even the notice sent by the counsel to make the payment has of no value in the eyes of defendants. Till filing of the suit from the year 2012, the defendants are in continuous default of payment and hence, they are liable to pay the extent of Rs. 5,00,000/- for the loss and sufferings suffered by the plaintiff company. Hence, I proceed to pass the point No.2 in Affirmative.
16. POINT NO.3:- From my above discussions and reasoning, the suit of the plaintiff deserves to be decreed. In the result, I pass the following:
13 CT0028_O.S._981_2016_Judgment_.doc .
The suit of the plaintiff is hereby decreed.
The defendants No.1 to 5 are jointly and severally liable to pay the plaintiff company the outstanding invoice amount to the tune of Rs. 18,59,003/- with interest @ 18 % p.a. The defendants 1 to 5 are jointly and severally liable to pay damages to the tune of Rs. 5,00,000/- to the plaintiff company.
No order as to costs.
Draw decree accordingly.
*** [Dictated to the Stenographer directly on computer, Script corrected, signed and then pronounced by me, in the Open Court on this the 24th day of September 2018.] (PRASHANTHI.G) XXVII Additional City Civil Judge.
BANGALORE.
14 CT0028_O.S._981_2016_Judgment_.doc .
1. List of witnesses examined on behalf of the Plaintiff/s:
PW.1 Ravikumar N.B.
2. List of witnesses examined on behalf of the Defendant/s:
NIL.
3. List of documents marked on behalf of the Plaintiff/s:
Ex.P 1 Computer generated purchase And orders.
Ex.P 2 Ex.P 3 Computer generated retail invoice Ex.P 4 Computer generated debit note Ex.P 5 Computer generated debit note Ex.P 6 Computer generated tax invoice Ex.P 7 Computer generated tax invoice Ex.P 8 Computer generated tax invoice Ex.P 9 Computer generated mail correspondence Ex.P 10 Office copy of legal notice dated 17/6/2015 Ex.P 11 Board resolution dated 10/7/2017 15 CT0028_O.S._981_2016_Judgment_.doc .
4. List of the documents marked for the defendants:
Nil.
(PRASHANTHI.G) XXVII Additional City Civil Judge.
BANGALORE.
24/9/2018 Plaintiff - SHR D1 to D3 - Exparte For Judgment....
. ...Judgment pronounced in the Open Court....
(Vide separate detailed judgment) The suit of the plaintiff is hereby decreed.
The defendants No.1 to 5 are jointly and severally liable to pay the plaintiff company the outstanding invoice amount to the tune of Rs. 18,59,003/- with interest @ 18 % p.a. The defendants 1 to 5 are jointly and severally liable to pay damages to the tune of Rs. 5,00,000/- to the plaintiff company.
No order as to costs.
Draw decree accordingly.
[PRASHANTHI.G] XXVII Additional City Civil Judge.
BANGALORE.
18 CT0028_O.S._981_2016_Judgment_.doc . 19 CT0028_O.S._981_2016_Judgment_.doc .