Delhi District Court
Napin Impex Ltd vs Vaibhav International Pvt Ltd And Ors on 8 April, 2026
IN THE COURT OF SH.SHAILENDER MALIK,
DISTRICT JUDGE (COMMERCIAL COURT)-02, NORTH
DISTRICT, ROHINI COURTS, DELHI
CS (COMM.) 513/2022
CNR No.DLNT010075442022
Napin Impex Limited
(Earlier Known as M/s Napin Impex Pvt. Ltd.)
Through its Director Mr.Gaurav Singhal
Office at: 1419, H-Block,
DSIIDC, Narela Industrial Area,
Delhi-110040.
Also at: 405, 4th Floor, KLJ Tower,
Netaji Subhash Place, Pitampura,
Delhi-110034. ...Plaintiff
Versus
(1)Vaibhav International Private Limited
(A Private Limited Co. & its Directors & representatives)
Address: 242, NEO Corporate Plaza,
2nd Floor opposite Kapol-Banquet,
Kachpada Malad (West),
Mumbai City, Maharashtra-400064.
Office No. 132-A Bombay Talkies Compound
Himanshu Rai Road, Malad-West,
Mumbai City, Maharashtra-400064.
Also at: Plot No.11, Gala No.10,
Premier Industrial Estate,
Kachigam Road, Daman Mumbai,
Suburban, Maharashtra-400064.
(2)Ashok Jayantilal Shah
(Director of Vaibhav International Pvt. Ltd.)
Address: 242, NEO Corporate Plaza,
2nd Floor opposite Kapol-Banquet,
Kachpada Malad (West),
Digitally signed
by SHELENDER
SHELENDER MALIK
MALIK Date:
2026.04.08
16:14:20 +0530
Mumbai City, Maharashtra-400064.
(3)Pankti Jayur Shah
(Director of Vaibhav International Pvt. Ltd.)
Address: 242, NEO Corporate Plaza,
2nd Floor opposite Kapol-Banquet,
Kachpada Malad (West),
Mumbai City, Maharashtra-400064.
(4)Jayur Kishor Shah
(Director of Vaibhav International Pvt. Ltd.)
Address: 242, NEO Corporate Plaza,
2nd Floor opposite Kapol-Banquet,
Kachpada Malad (West),
Mumbai City, Maharashtra-400064.
(5)Kishor Jayantilal Shah
(Director of Vaibhav International Pvt. Ltd.)
Address: 242, NEO Corporate Plaza,
2nd Floor opposite Kapol-Banquet,
Kachpada Malad (West),
Mumbai City, Maharashtra-400064. ...Defendants
Date of Institution : 24.08.2022
Date of judgment reserved : 07.04.2026
Date of judgment : 08.04.2026
JUDGMENT
1. This is a suit for recovery of sum of Rs.37,94,998/-. Plaintiff (formerly known as Napin Impex Pvt. Ltd.) is a company incorporated under Companies Act. Present suit has been filed on behalf of plaintiff company by its authorized representative/director Gaurav Singhal, duly authorized by board resolution dated 20.12.2021, to institute the present suit. Plaintiff company is engaged in business of marketing and sale of wide range of polymers raw material i.e. PVC, LLDPE, LDPE, HDPE, EVA Resin and related chemical products. Defendant is stated to be a private limited company, its representatives/officials Digitally signed by SHELENDER SHELENDER MALIK MALIK Date:
2026.04.08 16:14:27 +0530 approached plaintiff firm in 2015 after introduction of GST era for sourcing the petrochemical and polymers raw material of plaintiff company for their use/resale.
2. It is stated that the entire communication regarding receiving the goods from plaintiff company, held through telephonic/email, defendant company used to raise requirements of sourcing the petrochemical/polymer raw material by phone/ email and plaintiff company used to supply the material to defendant as per the orders. In pursuance to different orders placed by defendant, goods were supplied, it is stated that all the details of dealings, raising of invoices, receiving of on account payments, have been enumerated in running ledger account reproduced in para 8 of the plaint showing details of different sales, receipt of money as per which the last bill was raised on 26.09.2016 and last payment was received on 15.10.2018.
3. It is stated that in the plaintiff's books of account sum of Rs.37,94,998/- were outstanding towards defendant which defendant has failed to pay and therefore interest @ 18% is chargeable. It is stated that defendant sent confirmation of account by email dated 30.06.2018 whereby liability of the above said amount was admitted. It is stated that since the above said outstanding amount was not paid despite resorting to pre- litigation mediation, present suit was filed for recovery of above mentioned amount with pendente lite and future interest @ 18%.
4. WS though filed by defendants, however ld. Predecessor of this court by order dated 13.04.2023 took note of the fact that the WS has been filed beyond the maximum period of 120 days since the date of service, therefore defence of defendant was struck off. Precise pleadings in the WS however Digitally signed SHELENDER by SHELENDER MALIK MALIK Date: 2026.04.08 16:14:33 +0530 required to be taken note of. It is pleaded in the WS of the defendant that plaintiff and defendant had long standing business relation. It was mutually agreed wherein defendant agreed to pay Rs.38 lakhs to one M/s Prakash Plastics Industries on behalf of plaintiff, as plaintiff had some impending dues towards M/s Prakash Plastics.
5. Plaintiff has examined PW1 Gaurav Singhal who in his deposition of evidence has stated all those facts and referred to documents as :
(i) Print out of Certificate of Incorporation Mark X.
(ii) Print out of Board Resolution dated 20.12.2021 Mark Y.
(iii) Print out of Master Data of defendant no.1 Mark Z.
(iv) Print out of search report (GSTIN) of defendant no.1 Ex.PW1/4.
(v) Print out of tax invoices raised by plaintiff upon defendant no.1 Ex.PW1/5 (colly.)
(vi) Print out of statement of account of defendant no.1 Ex.PW1/6.
(vii) Print out of confirmation of accounts dent by defendant no.1 to plaintiff along with emails of defendant no.1 Ex.PW1/7 (colly.).
(viii) Certificate u/s 65B of Indian Evidence Act Ex.PW1/8.
6. I have heard ld. counsel for the plaintiff as well as ld. counsel for the defendant and have also gone through written submissions filed by plaintiff.
7. Having examined the evidence on record, while taking up the question of limitation first before examining the evidence on merits, it is admitted position as per the deposition of PW1 that dealing between plaintiff and defendant started on 08.05.2015. From time to time different invoices have been Digitally signed SHELENDER by SHELENDER MALIK MALIK Date: 2026.04.08 16:14:40 +0530 raised, the statement of account reflect the same which is Ex.PW1/6. From the statement of account it is also evident that last payment was made on 15.10.2018 of Rs.6 lakhs. Limitation therefore was coming to an end in October 2021. Apex Court in Suo Motu Writ Petition (C) No.3/2020 has laid down that period from 15.03.2020 till 28.02.2022 shall stand excluded for the purpose of limitation, as may be prescribed under general or special law in all judicial proceedings. It was made clear in para 5 of the order that where the limitation would have expired during the period from 15.03.2020 till 28.02.2022, notwithstanding the actual balance period of limitation withstanding, limitation period would be of 90 days from 01.03.2022, however if the actual balance period of limitation from 01.03.2022 is more than 90 days, then longer period shall apply. Therefore it can safely be concluded that present suit is very much within limitation.
8. Coming now to the merits of the matter, since there is unrebutted testimony of PW1 on the judicial record along with documents proved showing supply of goods from plaintiff to defendant which has also not been much disputed in the pleadings of defendant. Beside statement of account Ex.PW1/6, PW1 has also proved one mail dated 30.06.2018 Ex.PW1/7, wherein the defendant has acknowledged the liability of outstanding amount. Moreover defendant has taken the plea in the WS that in fact defendant has made the payment of Rs.38 lakhs to the creditor of plaintiff namely M/s Prakash Plastics, under the mutual understanding between plaintiff and defendant. It means that defendant has even in the pleadings acknowledged the liability but claimed to have made the payment to the creditor Digitally signed by SHELENDER SHELENDER MALIK MALIK Date:
2026.04.08 16:14:45 +0530 of the plaintiff to square off its liability towards plaintiff. That fact has not been proved by the defendant, as defendant has failed to led evidence on account of striking off of his defence. Fact remains that said aspect even not proved in the cross examination of PW1. Thus for the reasons stated above claim of the plaintiff is very much proved by preponderance of probability. As a consequence, suit of the plaintiff stands decreed for recovery of sum of Rs.37,94,998/- with pendente lite and future interest @ 18% per annum along with costs of the suit, to be paid by defendants.
9. Decree sheet be prepared. After due compliance, file be consigned to record room.
Announced in the open court (Shailender Malik)
on 08.04.2026 District Judge (Commercial)-02
North District, Rohini Courts,
Delhi
Digitally signed
by SHELENDER
SHELENDER MALIK
MALIK Date:
2026.04.08
16:14:50 +0530