Delhi District Court
Sliverline Graphics Pvt. Ltd vs Tara Art Printers Pvt. Ltd on 15 April, 2023
THE COURT OF SH. LAL SINGH,
DISTRICT JUDGE (COMMERCIAL COURT01),
SOUTHEAST, SAKET COURTS, NEW DELHI
CS (Comm) No. 250/2022
In the matter of:
SLIVERLINE GRAPHICS PVT. LTD.
Having its Office at
A140, Okhla Industrial Area,
Phase - II, New Delhi - 110 020.
Through its AR Mohd. Farhat Mansoor ........Plaintiff
Versus
TARA ART PRINTERS PVT. LTD
Having its Office at
B4, Ground Floor, Hans Bhawan,
Bahadur Shah Zafar Marg,
I.T.O, New Delhi - 110002.
Through its Director - Mr. Amit Tara .........Defendant
Date of Institution : 14.12.2021
Date of reserving judgment : 11.04.2023
Date of judgment : 15.04.2023
EX - PARTE J U D G M E N T
1.The present suit has been filed by the plaintiff against the defendant for the recovery of an amount of Rs.25,52,559/ along with pendantelite and furture interest @ 24% per annum and costs.
2. It is stated that the plaintiff is a company registered under the Companies Act, having its registered office at A140, Okhla Industrial Area, PhaseII, New Delhi - 110020. It is averred by the plaintiff that the plaintiff company was earlier known as J. N. Arora and Sons Pvt. Ltd and thereafter the plaintiff company got its name and titled changed to Silverline Graphics Pvt. Ltd., from J. N. Arora and Sons Pvt. Ltd, before the Registrar of Companies and got new certificate CS (Comm) No. 250/2022 Silverline Graphis Pvt Ltd vs. Tara Art Printers Pvt Ltd Page 1/9 of incorporation issued in its name. It is also stated that for the purpose of the present suit, J. N. Arora and Sons Pvt. Ltd., may be considered as Silverline Graphics Pvt. Ltd., i.e. the plaintiff company. It is also averred that the invoices raised by the plaintiff company were in the name of J. N. Arora and Sons Pvt. Ltd., however the present suit has been filed by the plaintiff company in the name and style of Silverline Graphics Pvt. Ltd.
3. It is stated that the plaintiff company is engaged in the business of supply of printing materials and inks. The defendant company is engaged in the business of printing and used to purchase printing related materials from the plaintiff. The plaintiff had business relations with the defendant since the year 2009 whereby the plaintiff supplied various qualities and quantities of printing plates to the defendant from time to time and raised regular invoices against such supplies. It is averred that the plaintiff supplied goods to the defendant from 01.04.2009 to 03.06.2014 and in the begining the defendant cleared the invoices raised by the plaintiff regularly, however after a point of time the payment from the defendant company became very irregular and thereafter defendant completely stopped making the payments to the plaintiff. As per the plaintiff, the officials of the plaintiff company called and pursued the defendant to clear the outstanding dues and invoices, but to no avail. Therefore, having left with no other remedy, the plaintiff got a legal demand notice dated 27.09.2016 issued to the defendant, calling upon the defendant to pay the outstanding amount of Rs.31,95,538/ along with interest @ 24% per annum which was the agreed rate of interest payable by the defendant in case of delay in payment of the invoice amounts. Plaintiff averred that the aforesaid legal notice was duly served upon the defendant, pursuant to which the defendant promised to clear all the outstanding dues payable to the plaintiff and thereafter, defendant made part payment from time to time for a total sum of Rs.2,27,284/, which was adjusted by the plaintiff CS (Comm) No. 250/2022 Silverline Graphis Pvt Ltd vs. Tara Art Printers Pvt Ltd Page 2/9 towards the principal amount due from the defendant. However, the defendant failed to clear the balance outstanding amount due to the plaintiff. Plaintiff also averred that the defendant again stopped making payment against the goods supplied to it after clearing the meger amount against the outstanding amounts. Plaintiff also averred that thereafter, the plaintiff got another legal notice dated 21.08.2017 issued to the defendant thereby calling upon to clear the outstanding dues to the tune of Rs.29,65,684/ along with interest @24% per annum and after that defendant again released meagre payments of upto Rs.50,000/ to Rs.1,00,000/ from time to time and paid a total amount of Rs.4,44,889/ over a span of two years till January 2020 and thereafter again started neglecting to pay the outstanding balance dues to the plaintiff.
4. It is also averred by the plaintiff that as per the accounts maintained by the plaintiff in defendant's name, a principal sum of Rs.25,20,795/ is due and payable by the defendant to the plaintiff as on 21.09.2021 and an unpaid outstanding balance of Rs.29,014/ (Rupees Twenty Nine Thousand and Fourteen only) towards the erstwhile J. N. Arora Graphics, a unit of erstwhile J. N. Arora and Sons Pvt. Ltd., which the defendant failed and neglected to pay despite repeated requests and reminders from the plaintiff. It is also averred by the plaintiff that the last payment made by the defendant to the plaintiff was to the tune of Rs.50,000/ as made on 14.01.2020 and after that defendant stopped releasing any further payment. It is stated that the plaintiff also got issued final legal notice dated 08.09.2021 to the defendant calling upon the defendant to pay the outstanding amount of Rs.25,52,559/, however the defendant failed to reply to the said notice or clear the outstanding dues of the plaintiff.
5. The plaintiff averred that cause of action firstly arose in favour of the plaintiff and against the defendant, when the defendant CS (Comm) No. 250/2022 Silverline Graphis Pvt Ltd vs. Tara Art Printers Pvt Ltd Page 3/9 stopped making the payment to the plaintiff against goods supplied and invoices raised by the plaintiff in 2016 and thereafter again arose when plaintiff issued legal notice dated 27.09.2016 and defendant released meagre amount of Rs.2,27,284/. As per plaintiff, cause of action further accrued when the plaintiff issued legal notice dated 21.08.2017 and thereafter defendant made meagre payments intermittently to the tune of Rs.4,44,889/ over a span of two years till January 2020 (the last payment of Rs.50,000/ made by the defendant on 14.01.2020) and it also arose when plaintiff got issued final legal notice dated 08.09.2021.
Thus, plaintiff prayed for a decree for recovery of Rs.25,52,559/ along with pendantelite and furture interest @ 24% per annum with effect from 14.01.2020 in favour of the plaintiff and against the defendant.
6. Summons of the suit were issued to the defendant but despite service of summons, neither the defendant appeared nor filed any written statement and hence vide order dated 12.09.2022 the defendant was proceeded ex parte.
7. In order to prove its case, the plaintiff has examined Mohd. Farhat Mansoor, AR of the plaintiff company as PW1, who tendered his evidence by way of affidavit vide Ex. PW1/A and also relied upon the following documents: S. No Documents Exhibits
1. Board Resolution dated 03.09.2021. Ex. PW1/1
2. Legal Notice dated 21.08.2017. Ex. PW1/2
3. Ledger Statement and proof of payment Ex. PW1/3 maintained by the plaintiff (page no. 83 to 89) (colly)
4. Certificate u/s 65B of Indian Evidence Act. Ex. PW1/4
5. Non Starter Report dated 06.12.2021. Ex. PW1/5
6. Copy of Incorporation Certificate, Mark - P1 Memorandum of Association and name change (colly) Cerficate. (page no. 19 to 29) CS (Comm) No. 250/2022 Silverline Graphis Pvt Ltd vs. Tara Art Printers Pvt Ltd Page 4/9
7. Unpaid Invoices raised by the plaintiff against Mark - P2 purchases made by the defendant. (colly) (page no. 30 to 77)
8. Copy of Legal Notice dated 08.09.2021. Mark P3
8. Arguments heard.
9. Ld counsel for the plaintiff submitted that plaintiff has supplied the goods (printing plates) to the defendant from 01.04.2009 to 03.06.2014, against which due invoices were raised and delivery was done, against which receiving was taken on the said invoices. She further argued that the plaintiff company was erstwhile known as J. N. Arora & Sons Pvt. Ltd., and duly got its name and title changed to Silverline Graphics Pvt. Ltd., before the Registrar of Companies and got a new certificate of incorporation issued in its name on 29.01.2015. She also submitted that for the purpose of the present suit, J. N. Arora & Sons Pvt. Ltd., may be considered as Silverline Graphics Pvt. Ltd. Ld counsel for the plaintiff also submitted that the invoices raised by the plaintiff were pertaining to period till 2014 under the name of erstwhile J. N. Arora & Sons Pvt. Ltd., which got changed to Silverline Graphics Pvt. Ltd., in the year 2015. She further submitted that in the beginning, the defendant made payments against the outstanding dues qua the invoices raised by the plaintiff but after a point of time, the payments from the defendant become irregular and therefore the plaintiff got issued legal demand notice dated 27.09.2016 and after that the defendant cleared some small amount against the total outstanding, however the defendant again stopped making payment to the plaintiff. Thus, the plaintiff issued another legal notice dated 21.08.2017 and thereafter, defendant cleared an amount of Rs.4,44,889/ in installments but again stopped clearing the dues of the plaintiff. Ld counsel for the plaintiff argued that the last payment made by the defendant was Rs.50,000/ as made on 14.01.2020. Thereafter, plaintiff again issued final legal notice dated 08.09.2021 to the CS (Comm) No. 250/2022 Silverline Graphis Pvt Ltd vs. Tara Art Printers Pvt Ltd Page 5/9 defendant thereby calling upon for payment of Rs.25,20,795/. Ld counsel for the plaintiff submitted that although the invoices are from 2014 but the suit of the plaintiff is governed by Article1 of the Schedule of the Limitation Act. She further submitted that the plaintiff had a running account with the defendant. Ld counsel for the plaintiff also submitted that though in the present suit, plaintiff has also claimed the balance amount of Rs.29,014/ qua J. N. Arora Graphics also but now the plaintiff is not pressing for the said amount of Rs.29,014/ qua J. N. Aroa Graphics from the defendant. Ld counsel for the plaintiff submitted that though the plaintif has claimed recovery of Rs.25,52,559/ from the defendant in the present suit, however, now the plaintiff is restricting the claim for recovery of only Rs.25,20,795/ from the defendant (the amount for which final legal notice vide Mark P3 issued by the plaintiff to the defendant) i.e. the outstanding amount due and payable by the defendant along with pendantelite and furture interest and costs.
10. I have heard the ld counsel for the plaintiff and also perused the record of the case.
11. During the course of arguments, ld counsel for the plaintiff submitted that plaintiff had a running (current) account with the defendant who was not paying against the particular invoices but against the entire outstanding in the ledger and payment entries would be added in the credit column whereas goods sold and invoice raised would be added in the debit column and the last payment was made by the defendant on 14.01.2020 and that is when the clock of limitation would start ticking. Ld counsel for the plaintiff also relied upon the judgment titled as Bharath Skins Corporation Vs. Taneja Skins Company Pvt. Ltd. {2011 SCC Online Del 5523; (2012) 186 DLT 290 (DB) wherein court has held that :
CS (Comm) No. 250/2022 Silverline Graphis Pvt Ltd vs. Tara Art Printers Pvt Ltd Page 6/920. In case of a running and nonmutual account between the buyer and seller, when goods are delivered by the seller to the buyer, the value of the goods is debited in the debit column and when amounts are paid by the buyer to the seller, they are entered in the credit column. The difference is continuously struck in the column for balance. In such a case, when the buyer defaults to make balance payment, the seller‟s action is not for the price of goods sold and delivered but for the balance due at the foot of an account. Thus, Article 14 would have no application in suits of recovery of money due on a running and a nonmutual current account between the buyer and seller.
In the instant matter, perusal of ledger statement maintained by the plaintiff vide Ex.PW1/3 (colly) shows that the defendant was making part payments intermittently qua the outstanding amount to the plaintiff from May 2016 to January 2020 and last payment of Rs.50,000/ was made by the defendant to the plaintiff on 14.01.2020. Thus, in view of the above legal position and facts and circumstances of the present case, it is amply clear that the present suit is within the period of limitation.
12. So far as the territorial jurisdiction of this court concerned, the registered office of the plaintiff is situated at Okhla, Delhi and invoices were also raised by the plaintiff from its Okhla office and hence same is within the territorial jurisdiction of this court.
13. In the instant case, the plaintiff has claimed the recovery of an amount of Rs.25,52,559/ alongwith pendantelite and furture interest @ 24% per annum from the defendant, qua the invoices raised by the plaintiff till 03.06.2014 while plaintiff company was known as J. N. Arora & Sons Pvt. Ltd., i.e. prior to the change of the name of the CS (Comm) No. 250/2022 Silverline Graphis Pvt Ltd vs. Tara Art Printers Pvt Ltd Page 7/9 plaintiff company from J. N. Arora and Sons Pvt. Ltd. to Silverline Graphics Pvt. Ltd. The said name of the plaintiff company was changed as Silverline Graphics Pvt. Ltd., on 29.01.2015. The plainiff has also placed on record the copy of incorporation certificate, memorandum of association and name change certificate (running from page no. 19 to
29) vide Mark P1 (colly).
The copies of unpaid invoices as raised by the plaintiff against the purchases made by the defendant also placed on record by the plaintiff company and same is Mark P2 (colly) (running from page no.30 to 77). The plaintiff has also placed on record the ledger statement maintained by the plaintiff and proof of payment vide Ex. PW1/3 (colly) (running from page no. 83 to 99). Since the defendant had not paid the balance outstanding amount, thus the plaintiff issued legal notice dated 21.08.2017 vide Ex.PW1/2 whereby the plaintiff called upon the defendant to pay the entire outstanding dues along with interest. Thereafter, the defendant started further part payments intermittently qua the balance outstanding amount and last payment of Rs.50,000/ was made by the defendant to the plaintiff on 14.01.2020. Plaintiff claimed that after 14.01.2020, the defendant stopped making any payment qua the balance outstanding amount and hence the plaintiff issued final legal notice dated 08.09.2021 vide Mark P3 thereby calling upon the defendant to pay the outstanding amount of Rs.25,20,795/ along with interest @ 24% per annum.
However, during the course of arguments, Ld counsel for the plaintiff also submitted that though in the present suit, plaintiff has also claimed the balance amount of Rs.29,014/ qua J. N. Arora Graphics but now the plaintiff is not pressing for the said amount of Rs.29,014/ qua J. N. Aroa Graphics from the defendant. Ld counsel for the plaintiff further submitted that though the plaintiff has claimed recovery of Rs.25,52,559/ from the defendant, but now the plaintiff is restricting the claim for recovery of only Rs.25,20,795/ which is the amount claimed by the plaintiff from the defendant vide legal notice CS (Comm) No. 250/2022 Silverline Graphis Pvt Ltd vs. Tara Art Printers Pvt Ltd Page 8/9 dated 08.09.2021 along with pendantelite and furture interest and costs. Perusal of legal notice dated 08.09.2021 Mark P3 also shows that the plaintiff has claimed the recovery of Rs.25,20,795/ from the defendant. Moreover, as per the ledger statement maintained by the plaintiff, the closing balance is shown as Rs.25,20,795/. Since the defendant has not paid the said outstanding amount to the plaintiff, hence the plaintiff is entitled to recover the said outstanding amount.
14. The plaintiff claims the interest @ 24% per annum from 14.01.2020 as well as pendentelite and future interest. However having regard to the circumstances that the claimed rate of interest @24% per annum is on much higher side and hence this court deems that the interest @ 7% per annum would be appropriate in the facts and circumstances of the present case.
15. The result of the aforesaid discussion is that the plaintiff is entitled to recover an amount of Rs. 25,20,795/ (Rupees Twenty Five Lakh Twenty Thousand Seven Hundred and Ninty Five only) along with interest @ 7% per annum from the date of filing of the present suit till realization of the amount. The plaintiff shall also be entitled to cost of Rs.40,000/ which includes court fees, advocate fees and other litigation charges.
16. As a result, the present suit is decreed in favour of the plaintiff and against the defendant. Decree sheet be drawn accordingly.
File be consigned to record room. Digitally signed
by LAL SINGH
LAL Date:
SINGH 2023.04.15
16:46:16
+0530
Announced in the open court (LAL SINGH)
on 15.04.2023 District Judge (Commercial Court01)
/SE/Saket/ND/15.04.2023
IR
CS (Comm) No. 250/2022 Silverline Graphis Pvt Ltd vs. Tara Art Printers Pvt Ltd Page 9/9