Bangalore District Court
M/S Matrix Cellular vs Kavitha Srinivasan on 14 December, 2016
IN THE COURT OF SMALL CAUSES
AT BENGALURU (SCCH-5)
DATED THIS THE 14th DAY OF DECEMBER, 2016
PRESENT: SMT. ROOPA K.N. B.Sc, LLB.,
VIII ADDL. SCJ & XXXIII ACMM
MEMBER - MACT
BENGALURU.
S.C No.1258 of 2015
PLAINTIFF : M/s Matrix Cellular
(International Services Pvt.
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, Mr.Nazeer
(By Sri.Kashyap N Naik)
V/s
DEFENDANT : 1. Kavitha Srinivasan,
W/o Chandraiah Chennaiah,
Residing at No.6161,
Janapriya Bharat Enclave,
1st Floor, Magadi Main Road,
Sunkadakatte,
Bengaluru-560 091.
(Exparte)
Date of Institution : 28-10-2015
of the suit
Nature of the suit : Recovery of money
Date of :
2 SC.No.1258/2015
SCCH-5
commencement 04-10-2016
recording of the
evidence
Date on which the :
judgment was 14-12-2016
pronounced
Total Duration : Years Month/s Days
01 02 16
(ROOPA K.N.)
VIII ADDL. SCJ & XXXIII ACMM,
JUDGMENT
This suit is filed by Plaintiff against the defendant for recovery of amount of Rs.15,619/- with future interest @ 18% p.a.,
2. The brief facts of the plaintiff is as under:
It is the case of the plaintiff 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 said connection. After being satisfied about the terms and 3 SC.No.1258/2015 SCCH-5 conditions, the defendant agreed to hire a mobile connection and categorically signed a statement that he has read and understood the terms and conditions of the Agreement Form and agreed to abide by them. Thereafter, several bills were raised on the basis of the defendant's usage of the said mobile connections. However, inspite of several requests and demands, the defendant has failed to pay a sum of Rs.15,619/-. Thereafter, the plaintiff through his counsel got issued a legal notice dated 20-05-2013. Hence, the present suit.
3. On issuance of summons, duly served on the Defendant, who remained absent and accordingly, placed exparte.
4. In order to prove his case, the Executive of Plaintiff Company examined as PW-1 and got marked documents at Ex.P.1 and 2.
5. Heard the plaintiff's counsel.
6. The points which arises for my consideration in this case are ;-
1. Whether the plaintiff proves that the defendant has availed 4 SC.No.1258/2015 SCCH-5 loan of Rs.15,619/- with interest at 18% per annum?
2. What decree or order?
7. My answer to the above points are as follows:-
Point No.1- In the affirmative Point No.2-As per final order for the following :-
REASONS
8. Point No.1:- the defendant had applied for International Mobile Connection in Bengaluru and produced the standard Customer Agreement Form containing the Terms and Conditions regarding the usage of said connection. After being satisfied about the terms and conditions, the defendant agreed to hire a mobile connection and categorically signed a statement that he has read and understood the terms and conditions of the Agreement Form and agreed to abide by them. Thereafter, several bills were raised on the basis of the defendant's usage of the said mobile connections. However, inspite of several requests and demands, the 5 SC.No.1258/2015 SCCH-5 defendant has failed to pay a sum of Rs.15,619/-. Thereafter, the plaintiff through his counsel got issued a legal notice dated 20-05-2013
9. In order to prove the above points for consideration, the plaintiff himself examined as PW-1 and got marked Ex-P.1- is the Authorization letter and Ex.P.2 is the Customer agreement form.
10. If we peruse the oral and documentary evidence adduced by the plaintiff, same shows that, the defendant has failed to repay from the plaintiff to the tune of Rs.15,619/-. All these documents makes it clear that, the defendant has become default in repayment of amount due to the plaintiff and the legal notice issued by the plaintiff also went in vain and hence there is no option left for this court otherwise to decree the suit of the plaintiff. Even the conduct of defendant in not contesting the case of plaintiff shows that defendant has indirectly admitted that he is due of suit claim amount. In view of all these reasons, I answer point No.1 in the affirmative. 6 SC.No.1258/2015
SCCH-5
11. Point No.2:- In view of my findings on point No.1 as above, proceed to pass the following :-
: ORDER :
Suit of the plaintiff is decreed against the defendant.
The plaintiff is entitled to recover the sum of Rs.15,619/- (Rupees Fifteen Thousand Six hundred and Nineteen only) from the defendant with costs and future interest at 6% p.a. from the date of suit till the date of realization.
Draw decree accordingly.
(Dictated to the stenographer, transcribed thereof is corrected and then pronounced by me on this the 14th day of December, 2016) (ROOPA K.N.) VIII ADDL. SCJ & XXXIII ACMM, MEMBER, MACT, BENGALURU.
ANNEXURE LIST OF WITNESSES EXAMINED ON BEHALF OF THE PLAINTIFF:
P.W.1 : Sri. Nazeer
7 SC.No.1258/2015
SCCH-5
LIST OF WITNESSES EXAMINED ON BEHALF OF THE DEFENDANTS:
-NIL-
LIST OF DOCUMENTS MARKED ON BEHALF OF THE PLAINTIFF:
Ex.P1 Authorization Letter Ex.P2 Customer Agreement form LIST OF DOCUMENTS MARKED ON BEHALF OF THE DEFENDANTS:
-NIL-
(ROOPA K.N.) VIII ADDL. SCJ & XXXIII ACMM, MEMBER, MACT, BENGALURU.