Bangalore District Court
Matrix Cellular (International) ... vs Sachin Thoms Philip on 28 July, 2015
Form No.9 (Civil)
Title sheet for
Judgment in Suits
(R.P.91)
TITLE SHEET FOR JUDGEMENTS IN SUITS
IN THE COURT OF THE SMALL CAUSES JUDGE
AT BENGALURU. (SCCH.18)
Present: Sri.Veeranna Somasekhara,
B.Com., L.L.B,
III Addl. Senior Civil Judge,
and Member, MACT,
Bangalore.
Dated: This 28th day of July 2015
S.C.No.168/2015
PLAINTIFF:
Matrix Cellular (International) Services Pvt. Ltd.,
A Company registered under the
Companies Act, 1956 and having its Branch
Office at No.95, 17th 'B' Main Road,
Koramangala,
Bangalore-560095,
Rep.by its Executive
Mr.K.Uday Kumar.
(By Pleader Sri.KNN)
-Vs-
2 S.C.No.168/2015
SCCH-18
DEFENDANT:
Sachin Thoms Philip
Resident of falt No.44,
Arjun Auss Apartments,
Vijaya Bank Layout,
Bangalore-560070
(Exparte)
Date of institution of the suit 13-2-2015
Nature of the suit (suit on
Pronote, suit for Declaration
and possession Suit for
Injunction, etc.) Recovery of money
Date of the commencement of
Recording of the evidence: 07-7-2015
Date on which the Judgment was
Pronounced: 29-7-2015
Total duration: Year/s Months Day/s
- 5 16
(VEERANNA SOMASEKHARA)
III ADDL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE,
COURT OF SMALL CAUSE
BANGALORE.
3 S.C.No.168/2015
SCCH-18
J U D G M E N T
The plaintiff company representative has filed this suit against the defendant for recovery of Rs.14,441/- with future interest @ 18% p.a.
2. The brief contents of plaint averments are as under:
The plaintiff is a company carrying out the business of international mobile connections in the name and style of Matrix Cellular (international) Pvt., Ltd., and having its branch office at Bangalore. Further the contention of the plaintiff is that, the defendant has submitted the application for international mobile connection in Bangalore and after agreeing the terms and conditions, he has agreed to hire a mobile connection and signed the agreement form. Thereafter the plaintiff has provided cellular services as agreed upon and the defendant availed the same. However, after some period of usage, the defendant has not paid bills of the mobile services amounting to Rs.14,441/-. 4 S.C.No.168/2015
SCCH-18 Hence, the plaintiff company has got issued legal notice on 20-5-2013 to the defendant calling him to pay the balance amount. But, the defendant has not paid the said due amount.
Alleging the above said cause of action, the plaintiff has filed this suit against the defendant for the above said relief.
3. After registration of the suit, the suit summons were issued to the defendant through court and RPAD and the summons issued through court is returned unserved and the summons issued through RPAD is served. In response to the suit summons, the defendant has appeared before the court and sought time for engaging the counsel and thereafter he has not appeared before the court. Accordingly, he was placed exparte.
4. On perusal of the contents of plaint averments and on perusal of the documents, the following short points arise for my consideration:
5 S.C.No.168/2015
SCCH-18
1. Whether the Plaintiff Company proves that defendant has taken international mobile connection from it and agreed with its terms and conditions?
2. Whether the plaintiff company proves that defendant is due for a sum of Rs.14,441/- as contended in the plaint?
3. Whether the Plaintiff Company is entitled for interest as claimed?
4. Whether the plaintiff company is entitled for the relief as prayed?
5. What order?
5. In order to prove the case, the Authorized signatory of Plaintiff Company has examined himself as PW-1 and got marked the documents as Ex-P-1 to 8.
6. Heard the arguments and perused the records.
7. My findings to the above points are as follows:
Point No.1 & 2 : In the affirmative Point No.3 & 4: In the partly affirmative Point No.5: As per final order 6 S.C.No.168/2015 SCCH-18 for the following:
R E A S O N S
8. POINT NO.1 to 3: These points are inter-connected with each other. Hence in order to avoid the repetition of facts, I have taken these points for common consideration.
9. During the course of argument, the learned counsel for the plaintiff argued by reiterating the contents of plaint averments and also evidence put forth by the PW-1. Further he argued that the evidence of PW-1 is supported with documentary evidence. Further the counsel for the plaintiff argued that, to disprove the case of the plaintiff, the defendant has not appeared before the court and also not produced any rebuttal evidence and documents. On the other hand, the plaintiff has proved its case by producing oral and documentary evidence. Accordingly, he prays to decree the suit.
7 S.C.No.168/2015
SCCH-18
10. On perusal of the records, it appears that, to prove the case, the plaintiff company has examined his authorised representative as PW-1 and he has stated in his evidence by reiterating the contents of plaint averments. In support of his evidence, he has produced the documents and the same are marked as Ex-P-1 to 8.
11. The contention of the plaintiff is that, the defendant has used the international mobile connection and has agreed to pay the charges and agreed with its terms and conditions of the Plaintiff Company. To prove the said contention, the PW-1 has relied upon the documents at Ex-P-2 to 6 i.e. Agreement forms with terms and conditions, copy of mobile bill and copy of account extract of defendant.
On perusal of Ex-P-2 and 3, it appears that, the defendant has executed the agreement forms in favour of plaintiff requested to give international mobile connection, by agreeing 8 S.C.No.168/2015 SCCH-18 the terms and conditions mentioned in the agreement. Further on perusal of copy of account extract it appears that, on 15-4-2013, the defendant is due an amount of Rs.14 ,441/-. Further on perusal of Ex-P-7 and 8 i.e. copy of legal notice and postal receipt, it appears that, before filing the suit, the plaintiff company has issued the legal notice to the defendant through its counsel calling upon the defendant to pay the due amount. In spite of notice, the defendant has not paid the due amount. Considering the above facts and on perusal of the evidence of PW-1 coupled with Ex-P-1 to 6, it appears that, the plaintiff company has proved the transaction taken place between it and the defendant as contended in the plaint and also proved that, the defendant is in due of amount as contended in the plaint. On the other hand, the defendant has not appeared before the court and also not produced any rebuttal evidence to disbelieve the version of the plaintiff company. Considering the 9 S.C.No.168/2015 SCCH-18 above facts and circumstances of the case and on perusal of the evidence of PW-1 coupled with Ex-P-2 to 6, I am of the opinion that, the plaintiff has proved the point No.1 and 2 by producing oral and documentary evidence.
12. The specific contention of the plaintiff company is that, in spite of notice, the defendant has not paid the balance amount. Hence, he is liable to pay future interest @ 18% p.a. But to prove the said fact, the plaintiff has not produced any document to show that the defendant has agreed to pay interest @ 18% p.a. if he failed to pay bill amount within prescribed period. On the other hand, on perusal of Ex-P-7, it appears that before filing the suit, the plaintiff has issued the legal notice to the defendant calling upon him to pay the due amount.
13. Further as stated above that, the defendant is due an amount of Rs.14,441/- as on 15-4-2013. Further on perusal of contents of plaint averments coupled with documents, it appears 10 S.C.No.168/2015 SCCH-18 that, the transaction taken place between the plaintiff and the defendant is a commercial transaction. Considering the above facts and looking to the nature of transaction and date of due amount, I am of the opinion that, if nominal interest is awarded certainly it would meet the ends of justice. For the above reason, I am of the opinion that the defendant is liable to pay future interest @ 12% p.a. from the date of suit till the date of realization.
14. Considering the above facts and circumstances of the case and on perusal of evidence of PW-1 coupled with documents and for the above reason, I am of the opinion that the plaintiff has partly proved these points by producing oral and documentary evidence. Accordingly, I answer the point No.1 & 2 are in affirmative and the point No.3 is in partly affirmative.
15. POINT NO.4: As far as this point is concerned, as stated above that, the plaintiff company has partly proved its 11 S.C.No.168/2015 SCCH-18 case by producing oral and documentary evidence. Hence, the plaintiff company is entitle for the relief as prayed in the suit. Accordingly, I answer the point No.4 is in partly affirmative.
16. POINT NO.5: In view of my findings on point No.1 to 4, I proceed to pass the following order:
O R D E R The suit filed by the plaintiff is hereby partly decreed with cost.
The defendant is liable to pay a sum of Rs.14,441/- with future interest @ 12% p.a. from the date of suit till the date of realization.
Draw decree accordingly.
(Dictated to the typist directly on computer, typed by her, corrected, signed and then pronounced by me in open court on this 28th day of July, 2015).
(VEERANNA SOMASEKHARA) III ADDL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, COURT OF SMALL CAUSES, BANGALORE.12 S.C.No.168/2015
SCCH-18 ANNEXURE List of Witnesses examined for Plaintiff:
PW.1 : Udaykumar.K List of documents exhibited for plaintiff:
Ex-P1 Authorization letter Ex-P2& 3 Agreement forms Ex-4 & 5 Mobile due Bills Ex-P6 Copy of Account extract Ex-P7 Copy of legal notice Ex-P8 Postal receipt
List of Witnesses examined for defendant :
-Nil-
List of documents exhibited for plaintiff:
-Nil-
III ADDL.SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE & XXIX ACMM.