Delhi District Court
Also At vs Smt. Rachna Gupta on 4 August, 2021
IN THE COURT OF SH. VIPIN KHARB: ADJ - 04
NORTH WEST : ROHINI COURTS : DELHI
CS No. 79123/16
Sh. Mahavir Prasad Goenka
S/o Sh. Keshav Dev Goenka
Proprietor of M/s. Goenka Bros.
C-91, Phase-4, Ashok Vihar
Delhi - 110052
Also at :-
D-2/64, Rajasthali Apartments
Pitampura, Delhi - 110034 ..... Plaintiff
Vs
Smt. Rachna Gupta
W/o Sh. Anil Gupta
Proprietor of M/s Raghav Trading Company
96, Pocket G-23, Sector - 7, Rohini
New Delhi - 110085
Also at :-
D-93, Delhi Citizen Society
Sector - 13, Rohini, New Delhi - 110085
Also at :-
D-2/602, Kingsbury, Kundli
District Sonepat, Haryana ..... Defendant
SUIT FOR RECOVERY OF RS 25,56,800/-
Date of institution : 19.10.2016
Date of decision : 04.08.2021
Final Order : Decreed
EX PARTE JUDGMENT
1.Brief facts of the case are that the plaintiff deals in various kinds of yarn / threads and has earned a good name in the market in his area of activity. The defendant is also doing business in the same industry in the name and CS No. 79123/16 Page 1 of 4 style of M/s. Raghav Trading Company. Husband of the defendant, Sh. Anil Gupta is proprietor of M/s. Anil Trading Company and both the defendant and her husband do the same business. The defendant and her husband were doing business with the plaintiff and received material sometimes in M/s. Raghav Trading Co. and sometimes in M/s. Anil Trading Co. but the payment was used to be made by M/s. Anil Trading Co. for the material received by both the firms. As on 30.03.2013, there was total outstanding of Rs.35,95,741/- of both of them towards the plaintiff. After 31.03.2013, they made payment of Rs.3,55,000/- and therefore net outstanding is Rs.32,40,741/-. Out of that Rs. 13,60,000/- was outstanding against M/s. Anil Trading Co. for which a separate suit has been filed. Rs.18,80,000/- was outstanding against M/s. Raghav Trading Co., defendant herein. Since Sh. Anil Gupta, proprietor of M/ s. Anil Trading Co. has been making all the payments against the supplies made by the plaintiff to M/s. Anil Trading Co. as well as M/s. Raghav Trading Co., therefore, he issued following cheques to clear the outstanding.
(a) Cheque No. 132864 dated 13.08.2014 for Rs. 13,60,000/- drawn on Andhra Bank, Chandni Chowk Branch, Delhi on behalf of Anil Trading Co.
(b) Cheque no. 700109 dated 16.08.2014 for Rs. 9,40,000/- drawn on ICICI Bank, on behalf of Raghav Trading Co.
(c) Cheque no. 700110 dated 13.08.2014 for Rs. 9,40,000/- drawn on ICICI Bank, on behalf of Raghav Trading Co.
These cheques were returned dishonored on presentation. Plaintiff issued legal notice dated 20.11.2014 to Sh. Anil Gupta for demanding the aforesaid amount. The same was received back unserved as the service of the same was refused by the defendant. Plaintiff has already filed a criminal complaint case u/s. 138 NI Act pertaining to cheque no. 132864 dated 13.08.2014 for Rs. 13,60,000/-. During the proceedings of criminal case, it revealed that defendant and her husband have started doing heir business from a new address i.e. D-2/602, Kingsbury, Kundli, District Sonepat, Haryana. Defendant and her husband have admitted the aforesaid outstanding and has supplied the ledger account of M/s. Anil Trading Company and M/s. Raghav CS No. 79123/16 Page 2 of 4 Trading Co for the period 2012-13 to the plaintiff. Thereafter, in the financial year 2013-14 the plaintiff received only a sum of Rs.3,55,000/- thereafter leaving a balance of Rs.32,40,741/-. The present case is with regard to the amount of two cheques totaling to Rs.18,80,000/- alongwith interest @ 18% p.a. for two years which comes to Rs.6,76,800/-.
The defendant and her husband despite service of the legal notice by way of refusal failed to come forward to clear their liability. Hence, plaintiff filed present suit seeking recovery of amount of Rs.25,56,800/- (Rupees Twenty Five Lacs Fifty Six Thousand and Eight Hundred Only) alongwith pendente lite interest and future interest @ 18% per annum from the date of filing of the suit till its realization.
2. After filing of the suit, summons were issued to defendant but nobody appeared on behalf of defendant despite service of summons on defendant on 28.04.2018. Therefore, she is proceeded ex-parte vide order dated 05.06.2018. Matter was then fixed for ex-parte plaintiff's evidence.
3. Plaintiff examined himself as PW1 and tendered in evidence his affidavit Ex.PW1/A wherein he reiterated the contents of the plaint and relied upon documents i.e. identity proof Ex.PW-1/1, photocopy of the certificate of Importer Exporter Code (IEC) issued by Ministry of Commerce and Industry Ex.PW-1/2, copy of ledger account of Anil Trading Co. and M/s. Raghav Trading for the financial year 2012-2013 Ex.PW-1/3 (colly), dishonored cheques Ex.PW-1/4 and Ex.PW-1/5, returning memos dated 07.11.2014 Ex.PW-1/6 and Ex.PW-1/7, copy of legal notice Ex.PW-1/8, postal receipts Ex.PW-1/9 (colly), returned postal envelopes Ex.Pw-1/10 (colly) and certified copy of ledger account of M/s. Goenka Brothers Ex.PW-1/11. After examining PW-1, ex-parte plaintiff's evidence was closed on statement of counsel for plaintiff on 22.02.2019. Matter was then fixed for ex-parte final arguments.
4. Ex-parte final arguments heard through videoconferencing. Record CS No. 79123/16 Page 3 of 4 perused.
5. PW1 duly proved the contents of the plaint and documents relied upon by him. His testimony to the effect that the suit amount is still outstanding and due towards the defendant has gone unrebutted and uncontested in the absence of any cross-examination on behalf of the defendant. There is nothing on record to disbelieve the same. The suit is otherwise well within limitation.
RELIEF
6. Accordingly, based on said unrebutted testimony of PW-1, I find that plaintiff is entitled to recover Rs. 25,56,800/- from defendant. Considering the fact that it was a commercial transaction between the parties, in the given facts and circumstances, after using judicial discretion, I award interest @ 9% per annum on the said principal amount to be recovered from the date of filing of the suit till its realization.
7. Suit accordingly stands decreed in favour of plaintiff. Decree-sheet be prepared accordingly after depositing appropriate court fees. Cost of the suit is also awarded.
8. File be consigned to Record Room after necessary compliance.
VIPIN Digitally signed by
VIPIN KHARB
Announced through videoconferencing KHARB Date: 2021.08.04
15:20:45 +05'30'
on 04th day of August, 2021. (Vipin Kharb)
ADJ-04, North West
Rohini Courts, Delhi
CS No. 79123/16 Page 4 of 4