Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

Delhi District Court

Roots Productions Pvt. Ltd vs Retail Matrix on 21 January, 2020

    IN THE COURT OF MS. MANISHA KHURANA KAKKAR,
 JUDGE SMALL CAUSE COURT­CUM­ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL
   JUDGE­CUM­ GUARDIAN JUDGE, SOUTH­EAST DISTRICT,
            SAKET COURT COMPLEX, NEW DELHI

CS No:554/2017

IN THE MATTER OF :

Roots Productions Pvt. Ltd.
Office at: 55, Panchsheel Colony,
Mahavir Enclave, Part­III, New Delhi­59.
                                                       .............PLAINTIFF

                                       VERSUS

1. Retail Matrix
Through its Proprietor
Mr. Ankit Arora
D­88/2, Okhla Phase­I,
New Delhi­110020.

2. Cannon India
Through its Directors
7th floor, Tower­B,
Building #5, DLF Epitome, DLF Phase­3,
Gurgaon­122002.

3. Logitech Engineering & Designs (India) Pvt. Ltd.
Through its Directors
G­6, Raja House, 30­31, Nehru Place,
Delhi­110019.

4. Daikin Air Conditions (India) Pvt. Ltd.
Through its Directors
201, 1st floor, Okhla Industrial Area,
Phase­3, Delhi­110020.                   ...............DEFENDANTS

(Defendant no. 2 to 4 already struck off from array of parties
vide order dated 01.07.2019).




CS No:554/17                                                       Page 1 of 5
Roots Productions Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Retail Matrix & Ors.
                  SUIT UNDER ORDER XXXVII OF CPC FOR
                 RECOVERY OF RS. 86,115/­ ALONGWITH COSTS,
                 PENDENTE­LITE AND FUTURE INTEREST.

                                               Date of Institution              : 06.05.2017
                                               Date of reserving order           : 14.01.2020
                                               Date of Judgment                 : 21.01.2020

                                             JUDGMENT:

1. This is a suit under Order 37 CPC, filed by the plaintiff against the defendant for recovery of Rs. 86,115/­ along with pendente lite and future interest @ 18 % per annum.

2. The case of the plaintiff is that the plaintiff is a private limited company constituted under the Companies Act, 1956 and inter alia, engaged in the business of event management, fabrication and interior/exterior designing, having its registered office at 55, Panchsheel Colony, Mahavir Enclave, Part­III, New Delhi­59. The present suit is being filed by Mr. Ambrish Kumar, Director of the plaintiff company who is duly authorized vide Board Resolution dated 25.04.2017 to institute the present proceedings against the defendants.

3. It is alleged that in or around June 2014, the defendants no. 2 to 4 (deleted) through their agent i.e. defendant no.1, approached the plaintiff in order to engage the plaintiff for the purposes of designing of stalls, furnishing of retail stores etc. The plaintiff undertook the aforesaid work relying upon assurances and representations that the defendant no.1 would pay towards the work done for defendant no. 2 to 4. It is stated that the defendant no.1 issued purchase orders from time to time towards the fabrication, CS No:554/17 Page 2 of 5 Roots Productions Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Retail Matrix & Ors. designing, erection of kiosks/stalls etc. severally on behalf of defendants no. 2 to 4. It is stated that defendant no. 1 is an agent of defendant no.2 to 4. It is further stated that the plaintiff executed the entire scope of work diligently, in accordance with the specifications as provided by the defendant no.1 on behalf of defendant no. 2 to 4, to the satisfaction of the defendant no.1 within the stipulated time. It is stated that the plaintiff raised various invoices from time to time against defendant no.1 for the said project to the tune of Rs. 11,15,918/­. It is alleged that the defendant no.1 was a regular client of plaintiff since June 2014 and had been engaging the services of the plaintiff until 2015. It is stated that the plaintiff raised the aforesaid invoices against defendant no.1, for the work of defendant no.2 to 4, to the tune of Rs. 3,81,630/­, Rs. 1,68,750/­ and Rs. 5,60,250/­ respectively. It is, however, stated that out of the aggregate of the aforesaid invoices of Rs.11,15,918/­, plaintiff has received a payment of Rs. 10,29,803/­ till date and an amount of Rs. 86,115/­ is still unpaid as per the books of account of the plaintiff. The plaintiff, therefore, requested the defendants to make the remaining payment of Rs. 86,115/­, however, the defendants refused to make the same. The plaintiff company, therefore, sent a legal notice dated 27.08.2016 which was duly received by the defendants. Hence, the present suit.

4. Summons as prescribed under order 37, Form 4, Appendix B Schedule­1 CPC were duly served upon the defendant no. 1 on 03.04.2018. Other defendants were struck off from the array of parties, vide order dated 01.07.2019 passed by Ld. Predecessor. Thereafter, the defendant no. 1 had filed memo of appearance on 17.04.2018. Plaintiff had moved an application on 20.04.2018 for issuing summons for judgment against defendant no.1. Consequently, CS No:554/17 Page 3 of 5 Roots Productions Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Retail Matrix & Ors. summons for judgment were issued against defendant no.1 vide order dated 08.08.2011. Thereafter, the summons for judgment were served on defendant no.1 on 15.10.2018. However, despite the same, defendant no. 1 failed to file leave to defend within the stipulated period from 15.10.2018, in terms of Order 37 Rule 3 (5) CPC.

5. I have heard arguments on behalf of plaintiff and perused the material available on record carefully.

6. Be that as it may, since the defendant has failed to file application for leave to defend, therefore, the plaintiff is entitled to judgment forthwith in terms of Order 37 Rule 3 (6) (a) CPC. Thus, in the absence of any defence being raised by the defendant no. 1, allegations in the plaint shall be deemed to be admitted.

7. The suit of the plaintiff is based upon original invoices No.024 dated 12.08.2014, 025 dated 12.08.2014, 026 dated 12.08.2014, 027 dated 12.08.2014, 028 dated 12.08.2014, 029 dated 13.08.2014, 031 dated 19.08.2014, 048 dated 11.11.2014, 049 dated 11.11.2014, 050 dated 11.11.2014, 066 dated 24.12.2014, 074 dated 31.01.2015 along with purchase order dated 04.06.2014, 12.12.2014 are placed on record. The suit of the plaintiff is within the prescribed period of limitation. As per the ledger account maintained by the plaintiff, the last payment was made on 29.07.2016 and the suit was filed on 06.05.2017 i.e. within the prescribed period under the limitation Act. The suit has been filed within the jurisdiction of this Court as the defendant no.1 company is located at Okhla. The goods were supplied to the defendant no.1 company at its address at Okhla as is evident from the invoices placed on record by the plaintiff company.

Roots Productions Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Retail Matrix & Ors.

8. Accordingly, the suit of the plaintiff is decreed in favour of the plaintiff and against the defendant no.1 for a sum of Rs. 86,115/­ and pendente lite and future interest @ 9% p.a. till its realisation, which appears to be reasonable and equitable.

9. No order as to costs.

10. Decree sheet to this effect be drawn accordingly.

11. File be consigned to record room.

Announced in the open Court                            (Manisha Khurana Kakkar)
on 21.01.2020                                           JSCC­cum­ASCJ­cum­GJ
                                                        South East, Saket Courts
                                                           New Delhi




CS No:554/17                                                            Page 5 of 5

Roots Productions Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Retail Matrix & Ors.