Delhi District Court
M/S Geodis Overseas Pvt. Ltd vs Aman Collections on 2 December, 2011
IN THE COURT OF SHRI RAJ KUMAR TRIPATHI,
ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE,
SAKET COURTS, NEW DELHI.
CS No. 211/2011
I.D No. 02406C0199942011
M/s Geodis Overseas Pvt. Ltd.,
having its registered office at
DLF Building No. 8, Tower A,
5th Floor, DLF City, PhaseII,
Sector25, Gurgaon, Haryana
Plaintiff
Versus
1. Aman Collections,
Through its Partners
D44, Sector59, Noida,
Uttar Pradesh201 301.
2. Mr. Sanjeev Sahani
S/o late Shri O.P. Sahani
R/o A423, IInd Floor,
Defence Colony, New Delhi 110 024.
3. Mr. Aswani Kumar
S/o late Shri Ram Murti Kumar
R/o S244, Greater KailashII,
New Delhi 110 048.
Defendants
DATE OF INSTITUTION : 05.08.2011
DATE OF RESERVING JUDGMENT : 28.11.2011
DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 02.12.2011
CS No. 211/2011 Page No. 1 of 7
SUIT UNDER ORDER XXXVII OF CPC FOR RECOVERY OF
RS. 81,043.40 (RUPEES EIGHTY ONE THOUSAND FORTY
THREE AND FORTY PAISA ONLY) WITH PENDENTI LITE
AND FUTURE INTEREST
JUDGMENT
1. This is a suit filed under Order XXXVII of The Code of Civil Procedure (in short "CPC") by plaintiff company for recovery of liquidated sum of Rs. 81,043.40 with pendente lite and future interest @ 18% per annum from the date of invoices till the date of payment and costs of the suit. After the summons of the suit were issued to defendants in the prescribed form as defined under Order 37 (2) (Sub Rule 2) of CPC, defendants have not entered their appearances.
2. The defendant no. 1 remained absent despite service of summons of the suit upon it at D44, Sector 59, Noida, Uttar Pradesh201 301. Defendant no. 2 remained absent despite service of summons of the suit upon him at A423, IInd Floor, Defence Colony, New Delhi. The defendant no. 3 also remained absent despite service of summons of the suit upon him at S244, Greater KailashII, New Delhi 110 048.
3. I have heard learned counsel for plaintiff at considerable length and have perused the record.
CS No. 211/2011 Page No. 2 of 7
4. The plaintiff is a company incorporated and registered under The Companies Act having its registered office at DLF Building No. 8, Tower A, 5th Floor, DLF City, PhaseII, Sector 25, Gurgaon, Haryana and engaged in the business of providing Freight forwarding and allied service solutions to its customers. The suit is instituted through Shri Samdarshi Lamba, Dy. Manager Legal & Company Secretary of plaintiff company, who has been authorized to sign and verify the plaint vide resolution dated 05.03.2010. Defendant no. 1 is a partnership firm engaged in the business of export and import. Defendant no. 2 and 3 are partners of defendant no 1. It is stated that plaintiff had been rendering freight forwarding and logistic services to defendant no. 1 and had commercial dealings with it. The defendant no. 1 through its authorized representative interacted with the executives/officer of the plaintiff for placing orders for different jobs in due course of their business. The plaintiff had raised an invoice No. DLDI1004398 dated 5.6.2010 of Rs. 48,229.30 for the commercial services Job No. IDAES1001029, invoice No. DLDI1004583 dated 12.06.2010 of Rs. 30,097.50 for commercial services i.e Job No. IDAES1001107 and another invoice No. DLDI1004762 dated 17.06.2010 of Rs. 2,716.60 for the commercial servicesJob No. IDAES1001138. It is further stated that an amount of Rs. 81,043.40 is CS No. 211/2011 Page No. 3 of 7 still outstanding and defendants are legally bound to make the payment as defendant no. 1 had availed the commercial services of plaintiff for its commercial needs. The plaintiff requested the defendants to make the payment of outstanding amount of above invoices but they failed to make the payment of Rs. 81,043.40. Plaintiff issued a legal notice dated 29.12.2010 through speed post. The suit is based on invoice No. No. DLDI1004398 dated 5.6.2010 of Rs. 48,229.30 for the commercial services Job No. IDAES1001029, invoice No. DLDI1004583 dated 12.06.2010 of Rs. 30,097.50 for commercial services i.e Job No. IDAES1001107 and another invoice No. DLDI1004762 dated 17.06.2010 of Rs. 2,716.60 for the commercial servicesJob No. IDAES1001138. which are placed on record by plaintiff hence the same is covered within the provisions of Order 37 CPC and is also tendered within limitation.
5. There is no relief claimed by plaintiff which does not fall within the ambit of the provisions of Order XXXVII CPC.
6. It is useful to refer the relevant provisions of law which are as under: Order XXXVII Rule 3(1) CPC.
(1) In a suit to which this Order applies, the plaintiff shall, together with the summons under rule 2, serve on the CS No. 211/2011 Page No. 4 of 7 defendant a copy of the plaint and annexures thereto and the defendant may, at any time within ten days of such services, enter an appearance either in person or by pleader and, in either case, he shall file in court an address for service of notice on him.
Order XXXVII Rule 2(3) CPC.
(3) The defendant shall not defend the suit referred to in sub rule(1) unless he enters an appearance and in default of his entering an appearance the allegations in the plaint shall be deemed to be admitted and the plaintiff shall be entitled to a decree for any sum, not exceeding the sum mentioned in the summons, together with interest at the rate specified, if any, up to the date of the decree and such sum for costs as may be determined by the Hon'ble High Court from time to time by rules made in that behalf and such decree may be executed forthwith.
7. In view of the above mentioned provisions of law, it is clear that if the defendants make default in entering their appearances within ten days from the date of service of summons upon them, the allegations as leveled in the plaint shall be deemed to be admitted and the plaintiff shall be entitled to a decree. As per record, defendants no. 2 and 3 stood served with the summons of the suit in prescribed proforma on 3.11.201 and 31.10.2011 respectively. All the defendants stood served with the summons of the suit in prescribed proforma by way of courier. Till date, no appearance has been entered into by the CS No. 211/2011 Page No. 5 of 7 defendants and accordingly the allegations leveled in the plaint are deemed to be admitted by them, entitling the plaintiff to a decree straightway.
8. The plaintiff has placed on record the statement of account of defendant company, invoice no. No. DLDI1004398 dated 5.6.2010 of Rs. 48,229.30, Airway Bill No. HAWB IDAES1001029, certificates of origin, shipping bill No. 2420607 dated 02.06.2010, shipping bill No. 2420617 dated 02.06.2010, invoice No. DLDI1004583 dated 12.06.2010 of Rs. 30,097.50, Airway bill No. HAWB IDAES1001107, certificate of origin, shipping bill No. 2433411 dated 09.06.2010, invoice No. DLDI1004762 dated 17.06.2010 of Rs. 2,716.60, Airway bill No. HAWB IDAES1001138, certificate of origin, shipping bill No. 2446498 dated 16.06.2010 and legal notice dated 29.12.2010. The documents placed on record shows that defendants failed to make the payment of invoice no. No. DLDI1004398 dated 5.6.2010 of Rs. 48,229.30, invoice No. DLDI1004583 dated 12.06.2010 of Rs. 30,097.50 and another invoice No. DLDI1004762 dated 17.06.2010 of Rs. 2,716.60 raised by plaintiff for the commercial services rendered and performed by plaintiff to defendants. From the documents, it is seen that an amount of Rs. 81,043.40 is due and payable by the defendants to the plaintiff. The defendants failed to clear the CS No. 211/2011 Page No. 6 of 7 outstanding dues of the plaintiff despite availing its services. Defendant no.2 Mr. Sanjeev Sahani and defendant no. 3 Mr. Aswani Kumar being the partners of defendant no. 1 Aman Collections are jointly and severely liable to pay the outstanding dues.
9. Hence, in the given circumstances as well as the submissions made by counsel for plaintiff, suit of the plaintiff is decreed with costs against defendants. Defendants no. 1, 2 and 3 are jointly and severely directed to pay a sum of Rs. 81,043.40 to the plaintiff with interest @ 8% per annum from the date of filing of the suit till the date of realization of decreetal amount. Decreesheet be prepared. File be consigned to record room.
(Announced in open Court (RAJ KUMAR TRIPATHI)
on 2.12.2011) ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE
SAKET COURTS, NEW DELHI
CS No. 211/2011 Page No. 7 of 7