Delhi District Court
Fps Worldwide Courier vs Rakvi Exports Pvt. Ltd on 4 March, 2017
1
IN THE COURT OF SH CHANDER MOHAN
CIVIL JUDGE 04 (WEST) TIS HAZARI COURTS
DELHI
CS SCJ No.9851/2016
FPS Worldwide Courier
WZ76B, Nangli Zalib,
Opp. Kothi No. 440/B1, Janakpuri,
New Delhi 110058
Through: Its Proprietor Ms. Ashima Bhagra.
....................Plaintiff.
Vs.
1.Rakvi Exports Pvt. Ltd.,
(iii)128/129, Sector37, PhaseIV, Khandsa, Gurgaon
(iv) C7, Jeevan Park, Pankha Road, Uttam Nagar, New Delhi110059
2. Sh. Kartik Sharma Director Rakvi Exports Pvt.Ltd.
3. Sh. Rakesh Sharma 2 Director Rakvi Exports Pvt. Ltd.
4. Ms. Kavita Sharma Director Rakvi Exports Pvt. Ltd.
5. Sh. Kunal Sharma Director Rakvi Exports Pvt. Ltd.
Address of Defendants no.2 to 5.
B4/14, Block B4, Paschim Vihar, New Delhi110063.
............Defendants.
SUIT FOR RECOVERY OF RS.1,87,008.00/ (RUPEES ONE LAKH EIGHTY SEVEN THOUSAND AND EIGHT ONLY) UNDER ORDER XXXVII OF THE CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE,1908.
Date of Institution : 02.01.2015
Date of reserving judgment : 04.03.2017
Date of decision : 04.03.2017
JUDGMENT :
1. The plaintiff has filed the suit for recovery under order 37 CPC for a sum of Rs.1,87,008.00/against the defendants jointly and severally with pendentlite and future interest @ 24% per annum. It is the case of plaintiff that she is a sole proprietor and is carrying on the business under the name and style of FPS Courier having 3 is office at WZ76B, Nangli Zalib Opp. Kothi No. 440/B1, Janak Puri, New Delhi - 110058. Defendant carries his business in the name and style of M/s Rakvi Exports Pvt. Ltd which is a private limited company and defendant no. 2 to 5 are its Directors. As per records maintained by the plaintiff during the course of its business, the defendants availed the services and transaction of the plaintiff from September, 2012 to March, 2013. The services were provided to the defendants on credit on the instructions of the defendants no. 2 to 5. However, the defendants failed to settle and pay the entire outstanding amount of last 7 invoices. The details of the said invoices are mentioned hereunder: Sl.No. Invoice Nos. Date of Invoice Amount
1. DEL/882 5.9.2012 3292.00
2. DEL/969 4.10.2012 23,373.00
3. DEL/1183 7.11.2012 24,142.00
4. DEL/1275 30.11.2012 22,385.00
5. DEL/1355 14.12.2012 31,375.00
6. DEL/1611 1.1.2013 24,134.00
7. DEL/1917 5.3.2013 3229.00 Total 1,31,696.00 4 As per the statement of account maintained in normal course of business by the plaintiff in respect of its invoices raised, payment received and dealing with the defendants, an amount of Rs.1,87,008.00/ is still outstanding on account of services provided and the same is due and payable by the defendants to the plaintiff since last payment on account made by the defendants on 05.03.2013 i.e. date of last invoices. Legal notice dated 29.09.2014 has also failed to secure the payment, hence, plaintiff has filed the present suit.
2. The defendant no.5 one of the Directors of defendant no.1 company on behalf of all the defendants entered his appearance after the statutory period and moved an application seeking condonation of delay in entering appearance. Same was allowed by this court and the delay in appearance was condoned vide order dated 19.03.2016. After that summons of judgment were directed to be served upon the defendants. However, defendants despite service of summons of judgment did not apply for leave to defend within statutory period or even thereafter. Accordingly under the mandate of order XXXVII CPC, the plaintiff is entitled to decree.
53. The plaintiff has placed on record copy of all the relevant 7 invoices and certified copy of the statement of account. The principal amount claimed by the plaintiff matches with aggregate amount of the invoices. He has also placed on record legal notice of demand alongwith postal receipts.
4. Further this court has pecuniary jurisdiction to try the present case since it is at suit for recovery for a sum of Rs.1,31,696/. Further this court has also territorial jurisdiction to entertain the present suit since the defendant is residing in Delhi.
5. Accordingly, in view of the above discussions, the suit of the plaintiff is decreed for a sum of Rs.1,31,696/ (Rs.One Lakh Thirty One Thousand Six Hundred Ninety Six) against defendant no. 1 company only alongwith simple interest at the rate of 13% (as the rate of interest claimed by the plaintiff i.e. 24% per annum seems to be on the higher side) from the date of institution of the suit till realization. There is no evidence on record to prove the 6 personal liability of any of the Directors. Decree sheet be prepared accordingly. Plaintiff is also entitled to cost of the suit.
File be consigned to record room.
Pronounced in the open court (Chander Mohan) today dated 04.03.2017. Civil Judge04 (West) THC,Delhi.