Delhi District Court
Gx Glass Sales And Services Ltd vs Skipper Properties Private Limited on 24 August, 2024
1
DLST010054982023
Presented on : 05-06-2023
Registered on : 07-06-2023
Decided on : 24-08-2024
Duration : 1 years, 2 months,
19 days
IN THE COURT OF DISTRICT JUDGE
(COMMERCIAL COURT) (DIGITAL-04),
SOUTH, SAKET COURTS, NEW DELHI
Presiding Officer: Sh. SANJEEV KUMAR SINGH
CS (COMM.) NO.357/2023
IN THE MATTER OF:
M/s G.X. Glass Sales & Services Ltd.
Through its Authorized Representative
Sh. Rajesh Dobriyal
Regd. Office at: 232, Tribhuwan Complex,
Ishwar Nagar, Mathura road,
New Delhi-110065.
..........Plaintiff
Versus
M/s. Skipper Properties Ltd.
Through its Directors:
(1) Harvinder Pal Singh
(2) Harjas Singh
(3) Prabsaran Singh
(4) Udaai Veer Singh
(5) Jaskaram Singh SANJEEV Digitally
by SANJEEV
signed
KUMAR KUMAR SINGH
Date: 2024.08.23
SINGH 21:55:46 +0530
M/s. G.X. Glass Sales & Services Ltd. Vs. M/s Skipper Properties Ltd. CS (Comm.) No.357/23
2
Regd. Office : Janak Cinema, C-Block,
Community Centre, Pankha Road
Janakpuri, West Delhi,
Delhi-110058
Also At:
F-101, Radhey Mohan Drive,
Ghadipur, Bandh Road, New Delhi-110074
...... Defendant
Date of institution : 07.06.2023
Date on which final argument was concluded : 08.08.2024
Date of Judgment : 24.08.2024
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
JUDGMENT
1. The plaintiff has filed the present suit against the defendant seeking recovery of Rs.8,90,037.92/- along with pendente lite and future interest @ 24% per annum.
BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE ARE AS UNDER:-
2. The version of the plaintiff is that plaintiff is a Limited company, duly incorporated under the companies Act 1956, having its registered office at 232, Tribhuwan Complex, Ishwar Nagar, Mathura road, New Delhi-110065 and is engaged in the business of marketing/trading and installation in variety of Aluminium Doors, Aluminium Windows, Architectural glass, Consumables and Fittings etc; that Shri Rajesh Dobriyal, Senior Manager (Finance & Accounts) of the plaintiff company has been duly authorized by the plaintiff company vide Board resolution dated 20.07.2019 to file the present suit; that the Directors of the defendant company, acting on its behalf represented to the plaintiff company that the defendant company is a Digitally signed by SANJEEV SANJEEV KUMAR SINGH KUMAR SINGH Date: 2024.08.23 21:55:52 +0530 M/s. G.X. Glass Sales & Services Ltd. Vs. M/s Skipper Properties Ltd. CS (Comm.) No.357/23 3 Private Limited Company, duly incorporated under the Companies Act 1956, operating from the registered office -Janak Cinema, C-Block, Community Centre, Pankha Road, Janakpuri, West-110058. The above- said Directors are in-charge of and responsible for conducting and managing the day-to-day business, affairs and management of the defendant company; that the defendant company acting through the Directors namely Harvinder Pal Singh, Harjas Singh, Prabsaran Singh, Udaai Veer Singh and Jaskaram Singh became one of the customers of the plaintiff company and apprised & represented to the officials of the plaintiff company that defendant company is involved in the business of trading, architectural building and services of Aluminium Doors, Aluminium Windows, Architectural glass, Consumables and Fittings etc.
3. The case of the plaintiff is that the defendant company being in the business of architectural building and services and in the business and trade of Aluminium Doors, Aluminium Windows, Architectural glass, Consumables and Fittings etc., and the plaintiff company being in the business of marketing/trading. and installation in variety of Aluminium Doors, Aluminium Windows, Architectural glass, Consumables and Fittings etc., would fall in the ambit of definition of section 2(1)(c) of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015 as the transactions between the plaintiff company and the defendant company are purely commercial in nature; that defendant company acting through its above-named Directors approached the plaintiff company at New Delhi for the purchase and installation of Aluminium Doors, Aluminium Windows, Architectural glass, Consumables and Fittings etc., and placed orders at New Delhi for the supply of the SANJEEV above saidDigitally materialsigned by SANJEEV KUMAR KUMAR SINGH Date: 2024.08.23 SINGH 21:55:59 +0530 M/s. G.X. Glass Sales & Services Ltd. Vs. M/s Skipper Properties Ltd. CS (Comm.) No.357/23 4 from time to time; that pursuant to the orders placed by the Defendant Company through its Directors, and against Performa Invoices Nos. (Project Nos) DEL/RET//2021/01/1230, DEL/RET//2021/01/1245, DEL/RET//2021/01/1245, DEL/RET//2021/01/1263 ,DEL/RET//2021/02/1326,DEL/RET//2021/04/1444, DEL/RET//2020/12/1210, DEL/RET//2021/02/1345, generated the plaintiff Company has duly supplied the consignments of Aluminium Doors, Aluminium Windows, Architectural glass, Consumables including installation, Fitting and other services to the Defendant Company vide 13 invoices bearing nos.
Invoice Date Invoice No Amount in (Rs.)
31.03.2021 T1/2021/01704/DL 67,431.10
31.03.2021 TI/2021/01706/DL 28,232.00
31.03.2021 TI/2021/01707/DL 12,007.00
31.03.2021 T1/2021/01712/DL 16,675,00
08.04.2021 TI/2122/00005/DL 3540.00
10.05.2021 TI/2122/00074/DL 5,89,605.00
04.06.2021 TI/2122/00149/DL 9,983.00
12.06.2021 T1/2122/00176/DL 23,600.00
30.06.2021 TI/2122/00300/DL 31,282.00
08.07.2021 TI/2122/00335/DL 1,33,724.68
08.07.2021 TI/2122/00336/DL 1,770,00
08.07.2021 TI/2122/00337/DL 22,851.90
08.07.2021 TI/2122/00338/DL 13,623.34
which were duly received by the defendant company (material was received via duly acknowledged delivery challan / Packing Lists) to its entire satisfaction and according to specifications and instructions.
SANJEEV Digitally signed by
SANJEEV KUMAR SINGH
KUMAR Date: 2024.08.23
SINGH 21:56:05 +0530
M/s. G.X. Glass Sales & Services Ltd. Vs. M/s Skipper Properties Ltd. CS (Comm.) No.357/23
5
4. It is further stated that the plaintiff company is maintaining a running account regularly in the name of the defendant company in its registered office at New Delhi wherein the business transactions between the plaintiff company and the defendant company are duly recorded from time to time, as per which there is an outstanding of Rs.8,90,037.92 and additionally interest @24% p.a. from the last date of transaction i.e 08.07.2021 is payable by the defendant company to the plaintiff company till date, along-with pendent lite and future interest, however the defendant failed to pay the same even after repeated requests, telephonic calls, e-mail reminders, etc; that the plaintiff company had got a Legal Demand Notice dated 18.07.2022 for recovery of their legally outstanding dues, issued upon the defendant company at their above-cited addresses through Speed Post on 18.07.2022, wherein the plaintiff company had informed the defendant company of their outstanding amount and further demanded the same from the defendant company. The notice was duly served on l9.07.2022 to the defendant company.
5. It is further stated that the plaintiff company prior to filing of the present suit approached the concerned Legal Services Authority, under pre-institution mediation wherein the defendant company was duly served with the notice and mediation was unsuccessful due to the reason of non-appearance of the defendant, as such Non-Starter Report dated 04.01.2023, issued to the plaintiff on 19.01.2023, has been issued by the SDLSA, Saket Courts, New Delhi.
6. It is further averred that the present suit is filed within limitation period as the last transaction between the plaintiff and the Digitally signed by SANJEEV SANJEEV KUMAR SINGH KUMAR SINGH Date: 2024.08.23 21:56:13 +0530 M/s. G.X. Glass Sales & Services Ltd. Vs. M/s Skipper Properties Ltd. CS (Comm.) No.357/23 6 defendant company pertaining to the supply, installation and service of above-mentioned material was dated 08.07.2021.
7. It is further averred that plaintiff company is working for gain in New Delhi, having its registered office in New Delhi, the defendant company approached the plaintiff company at the registered office of the plaintiff company at New Delhi and placed orders for supply, installation and service of above-mentioned material. The orders were processed, invoices were raised and statement of account is being maintained at the registered office of the plaintiff company at New Delhi. The defendant company voluntarily resides and/or carries out business and/or Works for gain at F-101 Radhey Mohan Drive, Gadhipur, Bandh Road, New Delhi. The material supplied by the plaintiff company was delivered and services were rendered by the plaintiff company to the above stated address and hence cause of action arose at the said address, which falls under PS Fatehpur Beri in South District - New Delhi and hence this Court has got the territorial and pecuniary jurisdiction to entertain and decide the present suit.
8. Summons of the suit were served upon the defendant on 18.08.2023 by post. The written statement was filed on 16.12.2023 with an application seeking condonation of delay of 90 days in filing of the same. Vide order dated 20.12.2023, my Ld. Predecessor relying upon judgment titled as SCG contracts India Pvt. Ltd. Vs. K.S. Cahmankar Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. (2019) 12 SCC 210 observed that written statement being filed after the lapse of statutory period of 120 days from the date of service, could not be taken on record. Accordingly, plaintiff was directed to lead uncontested PE.
SANJEEV Digitally signed by
SANJEEV KUMAR SINGH
KUMAR Date: 2024.08.23
SINGH 21:56:21 +0530
M/s. G.X. Glass Sales & Services Ltd. Vs. M/s Skipper Properties Ltd. CS (Comm.) No.357/23
7
9. On 17.02.2024, following issues were framed:-
1. Whether this Court has territorial jurisdiction to entertain and try the present suit? OPP
2. Whether the suit is within limitation ? OPP
3. Whether the suit has been properly valued? OPP
4. Whether proper Court Fees has been paid by the Plaintiff ? OPP
5. Whether the Plaintiff has exhausted the statutory remedy u/s 12-A of the Commercial Courts Act? OPP
6. Whether the dispute is a Commercial dispute u/s 2 (1) (c) of the Commercial Courts Act? OPP
7. Whether the prayer of the Plaintiff is as per the specified value u/s 12 of the Commercial Courts Act? OPP
8. Whether the plaintiff is entitled to the relief prayed? OPP
9. Relief, if any.
EVIDENCE & LIST OF DOCUMENTS:-
10. In order to prove its case, plaintiff has examined Sh. Rajesh Dobriyal, Senior Manager (Finance & Accounts) as PW-1.
11. In order to deal with the testimony of PW-1, the documents relied upon by the plaintiff are hereby put in a tabular form as under:-
S. No. Documents Exhibit
1. Certificate of Incorporation of the plaintiff Ex. PW1/A (OSR)
company
2. Board Resolution dated 20.07.2019 Ex. PW1/B (OSR)
3. DEL/RET/2021/01/1230 Ex. PW1/C1 (OSR)
4. DEL/RET/2021/01/1245 Ex. PW1/C2 (OSR)
Digitally signed by
SANJEEV SANJEEV KUMAR SINGH
KUMAR SINGH Date: 2024.08.23
21:56:29 +0530
M/s. G.X. Glass Sales & Services Ltd. Vs. M/s Skipper Properties Ltd. CS (Comm.) No.357/23
8
5. DEL/RET/2021/01/1263 Ex. PW1/C3 (OSR)
6. DEL/RET/2021/02/1326 Ex. PW1/C4 (OSR)
7. DEL/RET/2021/04/1444 Ex. PW1/C5 (OSR)
8. DEL/RET/2021/12/1210 Ex. PW1/C6 (OSR)
9. DEL/RET/2021/02/1345 Ex. PW1/C7 (OSR)
10. Performa Invoices No. T1/2021/01704/DL Ex. PW1/D1
(OSR)
11. Performa Invoices No. T1/2021/01706/DL Ex. PW1/D2
(OSR)
12. Performa Invoices No. T1/2021/01707/DL Ex. PW1/D3
(OSR)
13. Performa Invoices No. T1/2021/01712/DL Ex. PW1/D4
(OSR)
14. Performa Invoices No. T1/2122/00005/DL Ex. PW1/D5
(OSR)
15. Performa Invoices No. T1/2122/00074/DL Ex. PW1/D6
(OSR)
16. Performa Invoices No. T1/2122/00149/DL Ex. PW1/D7
(OSR)
17. Performa Invoices No. T1/2122/00176/DL Ex. PW1/D8
(OSR)
18. Performa Invoices No. T1/2122/00300/DL Ex. PW1/D9
(OSR)
19. Performa Invoices No. T1/2122/00335/DL Ex. PW1/D10
(OSR)
20. Performa Invoices No. T1/2122/00336/DL Ex. PW1/D11
(OSR)
21. Performa Invoices No. T1/2122/00337/DL Ex. PW1/D12
(OSR)
22. Performa Invoices No. T1/2122/00338/DL Ex. PW1/D13
(OSR)
23. Delivery Challan dated 08.04.2021 Ex. PW1/E1 (OSR)
24. Delivery Challan dated 10.05.2021 Ex. PW1/E2 (OSR)
25. Delivery Challan dated 04.06.2021 Ex. PW1/E3 (OSR)
26. 02 Delivery Challan dated 12.06.2021 Ex. PW1/E4 (OSR)
27. Delivery Challan dated 13.07.2021 Ex. PW1/E5 (OSR)
28. Delivery Challan dated 15.07.2021 Ex. PW1/E6 (OSR)
29. Statement of Account as on 31.08.2022 Ex. PW1/F
Digitally signed by
SANJEEV SANJEEV KUMAR
KUMAR SINGH
Date: 2024.08.23
SINGH 21:56:35 +0530
M/s. G.X. Glass Sales & Services Ltd. Vs. M/s Skipper Properties Ltd. CS (Comm.) No.357/23
9
30. Master Data pertaining to the information of Ex. PW1/G
M/s Skipper Properties Pvt. Ltd. from MCA
Website dated 07.02.2023
31. E-mail communication between plaintiff, Ex. PW1/H
defendant and architects working on behalf of the defendant company dated 20.10.2020 to
10.11.2020
32. Office copy of Legal Notice dated 18.07.2022 Ex. PW1/I
33. Postal Receipt dated 18.07.2022 for Speed Post Ex. PW1/J (OSR) of Legal Notice
34. Internet Tracking Report confirming delivery Ex. PW1/K of legal notice to the defendant on 19.07.2022
35. Non-Starter Report dated 04.01.2023 Ex. PW1/L
36. Bank Statement showing part-payment Ex. PW1/M received by plaintiff from defendant between 01.11.2020 to 31.03.2021
37. Certificate u/s 65-B of Indian Evidence Act Ex. PW1/N (OSR)
38. Affidavit as per Order 11 Rule 6 (3) CPC Ex. PW1/O (OSR)
12. PW-1 Sh. Rajesh Dobriyal in his examination-in-chief by way of affidavit corroborated what has been earlier stated in the plaint.
13. PW-1 was cross-examined by the learned counsel for the defendants. Question was asked from this witness that vide Board Resolution Ex.PW-1/B, he was not specifically authorized to file and pursue the present suit to which PW-1 stated that he was authorized to file the present suit. He was asked whether he ever met or ever interacted with the Directors of the defendant company and he answered that there is a Sales & Marketing Department which they called as Front End those are dealing with the customers directly hence there is no requirement of involvement of the Accounts team. To the question that what is the source of his information that offices of the defendant company is also at F-101, Radhey Mohan Drive, Gadaipur, Digitally signed by SANJEEV SANJEEV KUMAR KUMAR SINGH Date: 2024.08.23 SINGH 21:56:41 +0530 M/s. G.X. Glass Sales & Services Ltd. Vs. M/s Skipper Properties Ltd. CS (Comm.) No.357/23 10 Bandh Road, New Delhi-110074, he stated that all the inquiry generation is the responsibility of Sales & Marketing Department, hence he could not say. He further deposed that he never visited the office of the defendant company since there was no need for the Accounts team to visit the office of the customers. To the question that what is the source of his information "that the above-mentioned Directors of the defendant company acting on its behalf represented to the plaintiff company that the defendant company is a private limited company, duly incorporated the Companies Act, 1956, operating from the above-said address", to which he stated that MCA portal is the source of the said information.
14. Question was asked from this witness that is it correct that as claimed by him when the material was supplied to the defendant company after 01.04.2021 he was not present there and he does not know who received such material, he answered that he has said so on the basis of tax invoices Ex. PW1/D-1 to Ex. PW1/D-3 and Ex.PW-1/E-1 to Ex. PW-1/E-6. He was further asked whether he was present at the time of delivery of goods after 01.04.2021, he replied that it was the responsibility of the Dispatch Team of his company to ascertain the delivery of materials. He was further asked that could he say that who had signed the delivery challans Ex. PW-1/E1 to Ex.PW-1/E-6, he answered that he could not say. He denied the suggestion that no material was supplied to the defendant company after 01.04.2021. He denied the suggestion that purported running account is Ex. PW-1/F is absolutely incorrect as no material was supplied after 01.04.2021. He denied the suggestion that defendant company is not liable to pay any amount to the plaintiff company SANJEEV Digitally signed by SANJEEV KUMAR SINGH KUMAR Date: 2024.08.23 SINGH 21:56:47 +0530 M/s. G.X. Glass Sales & Services Ltd. Vs. M/s Skipper Properties Ltd. CS (Comm.) No.357/23 11 except Rs.60,056.25/-, he denied the suggestion that all e-mails exhibited by him are fabricated one. He denied the suggestion that no legal demand notice was ever issued on behalf of the plaintiff company nor was received by the defendant company. He denied the suggestion that contents of paragraph no.13 to para 18 of the evidence affidavit are absolutely false. He further denied the suggestion that since no material was dispatched after 31.03.2021 he has not given details of any vehicle through which the materials were allegedly supplied to the defendant.
15. Plaintiff's evidence was closed vide order dated 01.06.2024.
ARGUMENTS, ANALYSIS & FINDINGS:-
16. I have heard the arguments advanced by learned counsel for both the parties, considered the written submissions filed on behalf of the parties and have also gone through the entire record.
17. My issue-wise findings are as follows:-
18. ISSUE No.1 Whether this Court has territorial jurisdiction to entertain and try the present suit? OPP 18.1 The onus of proving this issue was upon the plaintiff.
18.2 Learned counsel for the defendant argued that this Court has no jurisdiction to entertain the present suit as the Registered office and place of business of the defendant company is situated at Janak Digitally signed by SANJEEV SANJEEV KUMAR KUMAR SINGH Date: 2024.08.23 SINGH 21:56:53 +0530 M/s. G.X. Glass Sales & Services Ltd. Vs. M/s Skipper Properties Ltd. CS (Comm.) No.357/23 12 Cinema, C-Block, Janakpuri, New Delhi-110058 outside the jurisdiction of this Court and the same falls within the South-West District; that the plaintiff has filed Company Master Data with its plaint from which this fact can be verified.
18.3 He further contended that since there is no office and/or place of business of the defendant company situated at F-101, Radhey Mohan Drive, Gadaipur, Bandh Road, New Delhi, there is no question of supply of any material by the plaintiff to the defendant at the said address. He further contended that except its own invoices, proforma invoices etc, the plaintiff has not placed any document to show that the defendant has its office or place of business at F-101, Radhey Mohan Drive, Gadaipur, Bandh Road, New Delhi with the jurisdiction of this Court.
18.4 Learned counsel for the defendant further contended that the plaintiff sent the alleged demand notice to the defendant at its Janakpuri address. If the defendant company would have its office at Gadaipur, why the plaintiff allegedly sent the demand notice at the Janakpuri address of the defendant company.
18.5 He further contended that no evidence has been led by the plaintiff to prove that any material was supplied to the defendant at Gadaipur address; that PW-1 Mr. Rajesh Dobriyal in his cross- examination dated 01.04.2024 stated that he never visited the said address.
SANJEEV Digitally
by SANJEEV
signed
KUMAR KUMAR SINGH
Date: 2024.08.23
SINGH 21:56:59 +0530
M/s. G.X. Glass Sales & Services Ltd. Vs. M/s Skipper Properties Ltd. CS (Comm.) No.357/23
13
18.6 He further contended that as no cause of action arose within the
jurisdiction of this court, this court has no jurisdiction to entertain this suit.
18.7 Learned counsel for the defendant relied upon the judgment passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of DHODHA House & Others Vs. S. K. Maingi & Others, reported in MANU/SC/2524/2005 18.8 Learned counsel for the plaintiff argued that the defendant company voluntarily resides and/or carries out business and/or works for gain at F-101 Radhey Mohan Drive, Gadhipur, Bandh Road, New Delhi; that material was supplied by the plaintiff company was delivered to the above stated address and cause of action arose at the said address which falls under police station Fatehpur Beri in South District, New Delhi and as such this court has territorial jurisdiction to entertain and try the present suit.
18.9 He further argued that on all the performa invoices (Ex.PW-1/C1 to Ex.PW-1/C6) STTE/Delivery address of the defendant is mentioned as F-101, Radhey Mohan Drive, Gadaipur, New Delhi; that on Tax invoices (Ex.PW-1/D1 to Ex.PW-1/D10) shipping address of the defendant is mentioned as F-101, Radhey Mohan Drive, Gadaipur, New Delhi); that on Tax invoices Ex.PW-1/D-11 to Ex.PW- 1/D13) shipping address is mentioned as C-289, Radhey Mohan Drive, New Delhi and these site/delivery address and shipping addresses fall within the jurisdiction of this court.
Digitally signed by SANJEEV SANJEEV KUMAR
KUMAR SINGH
Date: 2024.08.23
SINGH 21:57:05 +0530
M/s. G.X. Glass Sales & Services Ltd. Vs. M/s Skipper Properties Ltd. CS (Comm.) No.357/23
14
18.10 PW-1 has also deposed vide para no.1 of his affidavit in evidence regarding defendant's address at F-101, Radhey Mohan Drive, Gadhipur, Bandh Road, New Delhi. During cross-examination of PW-1, no suggestion was put to PW-1 to the effect that the defendant company does not operate its business from the said address and as such this court has territorial jurisdiction to entertain and try the present suit.
18.11 Perusal of Performa Invoices (Project Numbers) Ex.PW-1/C1 to Ex.PW-1/C-7 reflects site/delivery address as F-101, Radhey Mohan Drive, Gadaipur, Bandh Road, New Delhi. Similarly, perusal of Tax Invoices Ex.PW-1/D1 to Ex.PW-1/D13 shows shipping address as F-101, Radhey Mohan Drive, Gadaipur, Bandh Road, New Delhi. In Delivery Challans Ex.PW-1/E1 to Ex.PW-1/E6, Shipping Address is mentioned as F-101, Radhey Mohan Drive, Gadaipur, Bandh Road, New Delhi. This clearly shows that the goods/material were supplied at F-101, Radhey Mohan Drive, Gadaipur, Bandh Road, New Delhi and as such cause of action arose within the territorial jurisdiction of this Court. During cross-examination of PW-1, no suggestion was put to him to the effect that the defendant company does not operate its business from the address i.e. F-101, Radhey Mohan Drive, Gadaipur, Bandh Road, New Delhi and as such this Court has territorial jurisdiction to entertain and try the present suit as cause of action arose within the territorial jurisdiction of this court as well as the working place of the defendant is also situated within the territorial jurisdiction of this Court.
SANJEEV Digitally
by SANJEEV
signed
KUMAR Date: 2024.08.23
KUMAR SINGH
SINGH 21:57:10 +0530
M/s. G.X. Glass Sales & Services Ltd. Vs. M/s Skipper Properties Ltd. CS (Comm.) No.357/23
15
18.12 This issue is accordingly decided in favour of the plaintiff and against the defendant.
19. ISSUE No.2 Whether the suit is within limitation ? OPP 19.1 The onus of proving this issue was upon the plaintiff.
19.2 It is evident from the record that Tax Invoices are Ex.PW-1/D1 to Ex.PW-1/D-13 and Delivery Challans are Ex.PW-1/E1 to Ex.PW-1/E-6. First invoice Ex.PW-1/D1 is dated 31.03.2021 and the last part payment was made by the defendant company on 24.03.2021 and the suit was filed on 07.06.2023 thus, the suit has been filed within the limitation period of 03 years.
19.3 This issue is thus accordingly decided in favour of the plaintiff.
20. ISSUE No.3 Whether the suit has been properly valued? OPP 20.1 The onus of proving this issue was upon the plaintiff.
20.2 The suit has been valued at Rs.8,90,037.92 which is also the amount claimed by the plaintiff in "Prayer Clause" in this case. The suit has thus been properly valued.
20.3 The issue is thus accordingly decided in favour of the plaintiff.
Digitally signed by SANJEEV SANJEEV KUMAR
KUMAR SINGH
Date: 2024.08.23
SINGH 21:57:16 +0530
M/s. G.X. Glass Sales & Services Ltd. Vs. M/s Skipper Properties Ltd. CS (Comm.) No.357/23
16
21. ISSUE No.4
Whether proper Court Fees has been paid by the Plaintiff ? OPP 21.1 The onus of proving this issue was upon the plaintiff.
21.2 The suit has been valued at Rs.8,90,037.92/- and an advelorem Court Fee of Rs.12,000/- has been paid by the plaintiff by way of e- court fee.
21.3 This issue is thus accordingly decided in favour of the plaintiff.
22. ISSUE No. 5Whether the Plaintiff has exhausted the statutory remedy u/s 12-A of the Commercial Courts Act? OPP 22.1 The onus of proving this issue was upon the plaintiff.
22.2 The plaintiff invoked Section 12-A of The Commercial Courts Act, 2015 by approaching South District Legal Services Authority wherein the defendant company was duly served with the notice and mediation was unsuccessful on account of non-appearance of the defendant and Non-Starter Report dated 04.01.2023 (Ex.PW-1/L) has been issued to the plaintiff on 19.01.2023 by the SDLSA, Saket Courts, New Delhi. The statuary remedy has thus been exhausted by the plaintiff before approaching this Court for recovery of its dues.
22.3 This issue is accordingly decided in favour of the plaintiff.
Digitally signed by SANJEEV SANJEEV KUMAR SINGH
KUMAR SINGH Date: 2024.08.23 21:57:22
+0530
M/s. G.X. Glass Sales & Services Ltd. Vs. M/s Skipper Properties Ltd. CS (Comm.) No.357/23
17
23. ISSUE No.6
Whether the dispute is a Commercial dispute u/s 2 (1) (c) of the Commercial Courts Act? OPP 23.1 The onus of proving this issue was upon the plaintiff.
23.2 At the very outset, I may observe that the provisions of Section 2 (1) (c) (xviii) of Commercial Courts Act, 2015 are very clear which reads as under:
(c) "commercial dispute" means a dispute arising out of-
(i) ordinary transactions of merchants, bankers, financiers and traders such as those relating to mercantile documents, including enforcement and interpretation of such documents;
(ii) export or import of merchandise or services;
(iii) issues relating to admiralty and maritime law;
(iv) transactions relating to aircraft, aircraft engines, aircraft equipment and helicopters, including sales, leasing and financing of the same;
(v) carriage of goods;
(vi) construction and infrastructure contracts, including tenders;
(vii) agreements relating to immovable property used exclusively in trade or commerce;
(viii) franchising agreements;
(ix) distribution and licensing agreements;
(x) management and consultancy agreements;
(xi) joint venture agreements;
(xii) shareholders agreements;
(xiii) subscription and investment agreements pertaining to the services industry including outsourcing services and financial services;
(xiv) mercantile agency and mercantile usage;
(xv) partnership agreements;
(xvi) technology development agreements; (xvii) intellectual property rights relating to registered and unregistered trademarks, copyright, patent, design, domain names, geographical indications and semiconductor integrated circuits;Digitally signed by
SANJEEV SANJEEV KUMAR
KUMAR SINGH
Date: 2024.08.23
SINGH 21:57:32 +0530
M/s. G.X. Glass Sales & Services Ltd. Vs. M/s Skipper Properties Ltd. CS (Comm.) No.357/23
18
(xviii) agreements for sale of goods or provision of services;
(xix) exploitation of oil and gas reserves or other natural resources including electromagnetic spectrum; (xx) insurance and re-insurance;
(xxi) contracts of agency relating to any of the above; and (xxii) such other commercial disputes as may be notified by the Central Government.
23.3 The provisions of Section 2 (1) (c) (xviii) of Commercial Courts Act as above are very much clear. Sale of goods are governed by Sale of Goods Act, they pertain to movable properties, any dispute of sale or agreement to sale of goods of specified value do come within the jurisdiction of Commercial Courts Act. The clause also includes the services and guarantee given for the goods sold. The service or guarantee may be oral or written. Therefore, the facts which alleged in the plaint comes under the commercial dispute.
23.4 This issue is thus accordingly decided in favour of the Plaintiff.
24. ISSUE No.7 Whether the prayer of the Plaintiff is as per the specified value u/s 12 of the Commercial Courts Act? OPP 24.1 The onus of proving this issue was on plaintiff.
24.2 Section 12(1)(a) of the Commercial Courts Act, provides that specified value of a subject matter of Commercial Dispute for recovery of money shall be computed on the basis of amount to be recovered inclusive of interest upto the date of filing of the suit.
Digitally signed by SANJEEV SANJEEV KUMAR
KUMAR SINGH
Date: 2024.08.23
SINGH 21:57:38 +0530
M/s. G.X. Glass Sales & Services Ltd. Vs. M/s Skipper Properties Ltd. CS (Comm.) No.357/23
19
24.3 The Commercial Courts Act was amended on 03.05.2018 and by
virtue of the amendment and by virtue of notification, the pecuniary jurisdiction of the commercial courts shall not be less than Rs.3,00,000/-. In the present case, the claimed amount as mentioned in the plaint is of Rs 8,90,037.92/- and as such this Court is having pecuniary jurisdiction to adjudicate the matter which is in dispute.
24.4 This issue is thus accordingly decided in favour of the plaintiff.
25. ISSUE No.8 Whether the plaintiff is entitled to the relief prayed? OPP 25.1 The onus of proving this issue was upon the plaintiff.
25.2 Learned counsel for the plaintiff argued that pursuant to the orders passed by the defendant company through its Directors and against Performa Invoices as mentioned in paragraph no.6 of the plaint, the plaintiff duly supplied the consignments of Aluminium Doors etc. to the defendant company vide 13 invoices (Ex.PW-1/D1 to Ex.PW- 1/D13 which were duly received by the defendant company; that the material was duly acknowledged through Delivery Challan/Packing Lists (Ex.PW-1/E1 to Ex.PW-1/E6) and as per Statement of Account (Ex.PW-1/F) Rs. 8,90,037.92 was the outstanding as on 31.03.2022. However, the defendants failed to pay the same even after repeated requests, telephonic calls, e-mail reminders etc; that the plaintiff company issued Legal Demand Notice dated 18.07.2022 for recovery fo legally outstanding dues (Ex.PW-1/I ) to the defendant company through speed post on 18.07.2022; that the said notice was duly served SANJEEV Digitally signed by SANJEEV KUMAR SINGH KUMAR Date: 2024.08.23 21:57:46 SINGH +0530 M/s. G.X. Glass Sales & Services Ltd. Vs. M/s Skipper Properties Ltd. CS (Comm.) No.357/23 20 on 19.07.2022 which is evident from internet tracking report (Ex.PW- 1/K).
25.3 He further argued that prior to filing of the present suit, plaintiff approached South Delhi Legal Services Authority wherein the defendant company was duly served with the notice and mediation was unsuccessful on account of non-appearance of the defendant and Non- Starter Report (Ex.PW-1/L) dated 04.01.2023 was issued by SDLSA to the plaintiff on 19.01.2023.
25.4 He further argued that Bank Statement shows part-payment received by the plaintiff from the defendant between 01.11.2020 to 31.03.2021 vide Ex.PW-1/M and the last payment received by the plaintiff company from the defendant company is on 24.03.2021.
25.5 Per contra, learned counsel for the defendant contended that the plaintiff miserably failed to prove that the defendant is liable to pay any amount to the plaintiff except a sum of Rs.60,056.25/-; that no purchase order has been placed on record by the plaintiff; that there is no detail of transport/vehilce details through which the alleged delivery of material was done by the plaintiff to the defendant.
25.6 He further contended that there is no rubber stamp of the defendant company on any of the delivery challan to establish that the material was supplied by the plaintiff to the defendant.
SANJEEV Digitally
by SANJEEV
signed
KUMAR Date: 2024.08.23
KUMAR SINGH
SINGH 21:57:51 +0530
M/s. G.X. Glass Sales & Services Ltd. Vs. M/s Skipper Properties Ltd. CS (Comm.) No.357/23
21
25.7 He further contended that the plaintiff has failed to prove any
e-mail echanged between the plaintiff and the defendant. The
certificate under Section 65-B of Indian Evidence Act, 1872 is absolutely vague and thus not reliable; that all the correspondence, printout which have been placed on record by the plaintiff are forged and fabricated.
25.8 He further contended that PW-1 has deposed in his cross- examination that he never visited the office of the defendant company. In rebuttal, learned counsel for the plaintiff contended that it is not necessary for the Authorised Representative of the plaintiff company to visit the defendant company personally; that the suit was filed by the plaintiff company.
25.9 From the record, it is quite evident that delivery of goods was made by the plaintiff to the defendant company. Learned counsel for the defendant cross examined PW-1 at length but nothing material could be extracted so as to discredit the testimony of PW-1 as far as delivery of goods by the plaintiff company to the defendant company is concerned. Here a question arises as to why defendant company made part payment on 24.03.2021 when no goods/material was supplied by the plaintiff company as alleged by the defendant. Therefore, for the defence taken by the defendant is sham and moon shine.
25.10 The sum and substance of the above discussion is that the plaintiff succeeds in proving the liability of the defendant and the defendants fail to disprove their liability of payment.
SANJEEV Digitally
by SANJEEV
signed
KUMAR Date: 2024.08.23
KUMAR SINGH
SINGH 21:57:57 +0530
M/s. G.X. Glass Sales & Services Ltd. Vs. M/s Skipper Properties Ltd. CS (Comm.) No.357/23
22
25.11 The plaintiff is thus entitled to recovery of Rs.8,90,037.92/- from the defendants. The suit of the plaintiff is accordingly decreed for a sum of Rs.8,90,037.92/-.
25.12 The plaintiff has prayed pendente lite and future interest @ 24% per annum which is on a higher side. There was no written agreement between the parties as to the rate of interest. In the given facts and circumstances, simple interest @ 9% per annum from the date of filing of the suit till the date of realization shall meet the ends of justice.
Relief:-
26. Accordingly, the suit of the plaintiff is decreed for a sum of Rs.8,90,037.92/- in favour of the plaintiff and against the defendants who are jointly & severally liable alongwith simple interest @ 9% per annum from the date of filing of the suit till realization.
27. Costs of the suit is also awarded in favour of the plaintiff.
28. Decree sheet be drawn accordingly.
29. File be consigned to record room after due compliance.
Digitally signed SANJEEV by SANJEEV
KUMAR KUMAR SINGH
Date: 2024.08.23
Announced in the open court SINGH 21:58:03 +0530
on 24.08.2024 (Sanjeev Kumar Singh)
District Judge (Commercial Court)(Digital)-04, South/Saket/New Delhi M/s. G.X. Glass Sales & Services Ltd. Vs. M/s Skipper Properties Ltd. CS (Comm.) No.357/23