Delhi District Court
Scj Plastics Ltd vs M/S S.I. Precision Mould Pvt. Ltd on 10 December, 2020
IN THE COURT OF SENIOR CIVIL JUDGECUMRENT
CONTROLLER , SOUTHEAST DISTRICT,
SAKET COURTS, NEW DELHI
Presided By : Ms. Manisha Khurana Kakkar, DJS
Civil Suit No.396/2017
SCJ PLASTICS LTD.
Office at: F3/1011, Okhla Industrial Area
Phase1
New Delhi110020 ... Plaintiff
Versus
1.M/S S.I. PRECISION MOULD PVT. LTD.
having Registered Office at: F29, Basement,
Green Park Main,
New Delhi110016.
Works at:
Plot no. B6, SIPCOT Industrial Growth Centre,
Vaippur A Village,
Orragadam602105(TN). ... Defendant no. 1.
2. M/S STELLAR PLASTICS (INDIA) PVT. LTD.
Office at: B6, SIPCOT Industrial Growth Centre,
Vaippur A Village,
Orragadam602105(TN). ... Defendant no. 2.
(Deleted vide order dated 03.04.2019)
3. MR. MYUNG BO KIN, MANAGING DIRECTOR
M/S S.I. Precision Mould Pvt. Ltd.
B6, SIPCOT Industrial Growth Centre,
Vaippur A Village,
Orragadam602105(TN). ... Defendant no. 3.
SUIT FOR RECOVERY OF RS. 2,48,820/
(Under Order XXXVII of CPC)
CS NO. 396/2017 SCJ PLASTIC LTD. VS. S.I. PRECISION MOULD PVT. LTD. & ORS. PAGE 1 OF 7
DATE OF INSTITUTION : 06.04.2017
DATE OF ARGUMENTS :28.11.2020
DATE OF DECISION :10.12.2020
JUDGMENT
1. The plaintiff is a Limited Company duly registered with ROC, Delhi and Haryana and having its registered office at Okhla Industrial area, Delhi. The present suit has been signed, verified and instituted by Mr. Deepak Kumar, Marketing Executive of the plaintiff company, who has been duly authorized to do so on behalf of the plaintiff company vide board resolution dated 01.04.2017.
Plaintiff's case
2. The plaintiff company deals in master batches and compounds.
Defendant no. 1 is a Pvt. Ltd. Company duly registered with Registrar of Companies, Delhi and Haryana and is having its registered office at F29, Basement, Green Park Main, New Delhi 110016. Defendant no.2 is also a Pvt. Ltd. company, which is also duly registered with ROC and is situated at and is operating from the same address where the works of defendant no.1 company at the aforesaid address at Tamil Nadu is situated. It is averred that defendant no.2 is liable for the debts of defendant no.1 company because defendant no.1 had been taken over by defendant no.2 or because there had been agreement between defendant no.2 and defendant no.1 regarding payment of dues of defendant no.1 by defendant no.2.
CS NO. 396/2017 SCJ PLASTIC LTD. VS. S.I. PRECISION MOULD PVT. LTD. & ORS. PAGE 2 OF 7
3. Plaintiff states that defendant no.3 is the Managing Director of defendant no.1, who had been actively managing the affairs of defendant no.1 company. It is averred that defendant no.1 company had purchased master batches from the plaintiff even prior to 05.02.2014 on credit of 60 days which were paid vide Cheque/DD payable at Delhi/New Delhi. It is averred that order for supply of master batches were received and accepted by the plaintiff at its office at Okhla, New Delhi. As per the plaintiff, on 05.02.2014 and 24.03.2014, defendant no.1 had purchased master batches worth Rs. 1,96,523/from the plaintiff on credit of upto 60 days and subject to jurisdiction of Delhi courts.
4. The details of the afore mentioned invoices are as under -
Invoice No. Date Amount (in Rs.)
3613 05.02.2014 1,46,315/
4070 24.03.2014 50,208/
5. Defendant no.1 had duly received the master batches as supplied by the plaintiff vide said two invoices, which were duly accompanied with Test Report of the master batches supplied by the plaintiff to defendant no.1.
6. As per the plaintiff, defendant no.1 had made a part payment of Rs. 50,983/ against the aforesaid said two invoices. Thus, plaintiff has inter alia claimed that a balance payment of Rs. 1,45,540/ is still due to be paid by defendant no.1 and that the defendant no.1 has failed to make the said payment to the plaintiff despite repeated demands. As per the plaintiff, defendant no.1 is also liable to pay a sum of Rs. 1,03,280/ in respect of the said invoices, as interest CS NO. 396/2017 SCJ PLASTIC LTD. VS. S.I. PRECISION MOULD PVT. LTD. & ORS. PAGE 3 OF 7 from the date of expiry of credit period of 60 days up to the date of realization of the said amount. It is, thus, alleged that all the defendants are jointly, severally and personally liable to pay a sum of Rs2,48,820/ to the plaintiff, for which the plaintiff had also sent a legal notice dated 31.08.2015 to the defendant company. However, plaintiff has claimed that the defendants failed to pay the said amount despite the same. Hence, the present suit which has been filed under Order 37 CPC.
7. Vide order dated 19.05.2017, the present suit had been treated as ordinary suit by Ld. Predecessor and the summons of the suit were accordingly issued to the defendants. Vide order dated 03.04.2019, defendant no.2 was deleted from the array of parties by Ld. Predecessor. With respect to defendant nos.1 & 3, the summons of the suit were duly served upon them by way of publication in newspaper 'Business Standard" dated 27.02.2019. However, despite service, they both did not appear before the Court. Hence, defendant no. 1 company was proceeded exparte vide order dated 28.08.2019 passed by Ld. Predecessor. Thereafter, matter was listed for exparte evidence of the plaintiff.
Appreciation of Evidence/Findings/Analysis:
8. Exparte evidence of PW1 Sh. Deepak Kumar was recorded, on 28.08.2019.
9. I have heard Sh. Pankaj Chaudhary, Ld. Advocate for the plaintiff, on 28.11.2020. During final arguments addressed by the Ld. Advocate for the plaintiff had submitted that the case of the plaintiff stands duly proved by virtue of unchallenged testimony of CS NO. 396/2017 SCJ PLASTIC LTD. VS. S.I. PRECISION MOULD PVT. LTD. & ORS. PAGE 4 OF 7 PW1 Sh. Deepak Kumar and as such, the plaintiff should be granted the decree, as prayed for.
10. In order to prove its case, the plaintiff has relied upon the unchallenged testimony of PW1 Sh. Deepak Kumar, interalia supported by the board resolution dated 01.04.2017, Ex.PW1/1, certificate of incorporation, Ex. PW1/2(OSR), Invoice no. 3613 Ex.
PW1/3, Invoice no. 4070, Ex. PW1/4, Statement of account maintained by plaintiff, Ex. PW1/5, certificate under Section 65B of the Evidence Act, 1872, Ex.PW1/6, copy of legal notice dated 31.08.2015, Ex. PW1/7, postal receipts and AD card, Ex. PW1/8, PW1/9, PW1/10 and PW1/11 respectively and MoU dated 01.07.2015, between defendant nos. 1 & 2, Mark A.
11. The plaintiff has relied upon two invoices bearing no. 3613 dated 05.02.2014 for Rs. 1,46,315/ Ex. PW1/3 and invoice no. 4070, dated 24.03.2014 for Rs. 50,208/ Ex. PW1/4. The present suit was filed on 05.04.2017. As per the case of the plaintiff, payment of the said invoices was to be made by defendant no.1 after the expiry of credit period of 60 days. Thus, period of limitation had commenced after expiry of the said credit period. The suit of the plaintiff, has thus, duly been instituted within the period of limitation.
12. The suit of the plaintiff has been filed within the jurisdiction of this Court as the goods are stated to have supplied by the plaintiff from its office at Okhla Industrial Area, New Delhi, which falls within the jurisdiction of this Court.
13. The plaintiff has conceded that defendant no.1 had made payment to the tune of Rs. 1,19,845/ in respect of goods purchased by defendant no.1 prior to 05.02.2014 and Rs. 50,983/ towards the CS NO. 396/2017 SCJ PLASTIC LTD. VS. S.I. PRECISION MOULD PVT. LTD. & ORS. PAGE 5 OF 7 part payment of goods purchased by defendant no.1 vide the aforesaid two invoices i.e. Ex. PW1/3 and Ex. PW1/4. The plaintiff has placed on record the ledger account statement maintained by it during the ordinary course of business with defendant no.1 w.e.f 01.04.2009 to 31.03.2012 i.e. Ex. PW1/5 as well as ledger account statement w.e.f. 01.04.2014 to 03.04.2015. As per the said statement of account, a sum of Rs. 1,45,540/is stated to be outstanding against defendant no.1 company.
14. Defendant no.1 has failed to appear and the testimony of the plaintiff has remained unchallenged and untraversed. In view of the aforesaid invoices placed on record and the ledger account statement placed on record as aforementioned, the claim of the plaintiff is established qua recovery of Rs. 1,45,540/ against defendant no.1.
15. Plaintiff has also claimed that defendant no.3 had been maintaining the affairs of defendant no.1 company fraudulently to cheat the suppliers in the guise of defendant no.1 company and defendant no.3 is also personally, jointly and severally liable for the debts of defendant no.1 company. However, it is a matter of record that apart from the testimony of PW1, no other evidence has been led to that effect. Therefore, the said claim has not been duly proved by the plaintiff against defendant no.3.
Relief:
16. In view thereof, the plaintiff is entitled to a decree of Rs. 1,45,540/ against defendant No.1 company. The plaintiff has also claimed interest @ 24% per annum to the tune of Rs. 1,03,280/ as interest from the date of expiry of credit period of 60 days till the CS NO. 396/2017 SCJ PLASTIC LTD. VS. S.I. PRECISION MOULD PVT. LTD. & ORS. PAGE 6 OF 7 date of the filing of the suit. However, the same is exorbitant and unwarranted. Therefore, the plaintiff is entitled to pendentelite and future interest @ 9% per annum from the date of filing of the suit till its realization along with costs of the suit against defendant no.1 company.
17. After preparation of the decree sheet by the Reader, the file shall be consigned to the record room.
Announced in open Court (Manisha Khurana Kakkar) today on 10.12.2020 Senior Civil JudgecumRent Controller, South East, Saket Courts, New Delhi This judgment contains 07 pages and each page is signed by me.
(Manisha Khurana Kakkar) Senior Civil Judge cum Rent Controller SouthEast, Saket Courts, New Delhi CS NO. 396/2017 SCJ PLASTIC LTD. VS. S.I. PRECISION MOULD PVT. LTD. & ORS. PAGE 7 OF 7