Delhi District Court
Harshad Gupta vs Green Waves Environmental Solutions ... on 29 October, 2024
IN THE COURT OF SANJEEV KUMAR MALHOTRA
DISTRICT JUDGE (COMMERCIAL COURT)
NORTH EAST: KARKARDOOMA COURTS: DELHI
CS (Comm.) 59/2023
CNR No.DLNE01-001699-2023
Harshad Gupta
Prop. of H G Strategic Consultancy
1/9228, Second Floor, Street No.7, West Rohtash
Nagar, Shahdara, Delhi-110032.
Also at:-
Kh. No.13,15/1, Thana Road, Karawal Nagar,
Balaji Dharm Kanta, Delhi-110094. .....Plaintiff
Versus
1. M/s Green Waves Environmental Solutions
R/o 43/1, Mindhi Village, Gajuwaka, Vizag,
Andhra Pradesh-530012.
Also at:-
3/F-3, Models Millennium Vistas,
Caranzalem, Panaji, Goa-403002. .....Defendant no.1
2. Anil Chowdary Potluri
R/o Besides 14, NRI College Road,
Hi-Rise Colony Line, Nizampet,
Hyderabad-500072.
Also at:-
Plot No.167C, Western Hills,
Addagutta Society, Opposite JNTU,
Kakatpally, Hyderabad-500072. ... Defendant no.2
3. Sayana Sai Brahmani
R/o Besides 14, NRI College Road,
Hi-Rise Colony Line, Nizampet,
Hyderabad-500072. ....Defendant no.3
4. Kunnaparaju Pranesh Verma
S/o K. Prabhakar Soma
R/o Flat no.1402, Block-A, Aspire Apartments
CS (Comm.) 59/2023 Harshad Gupta vs. M/s Green Waves Environmental Solutions and Ors. Page 1 of 13
Digitally signed
by SANJEEV
SANJEEV KUMAR
KUMAR MALHOTRA
MALHOTRA Date:
2024.10.29
15:41:48 +0530
Sy No.18, 19 & 48, Inorbit Mall Road
Madhapur, Serillingampally Rangareddy
District- Telangana ....Defendant no.4
Date of Institution : 07.06.2023
Date of Arguments : 25.09.2024
Date of Judgment : 29.10.2024
JUDGMENT
1. This is a suit for recovery of Rs.5,12,308/- (Five Lakh Twelve Thousand Three Hundred Eight Only) alongwith pendente lite and future interest @ 18 % per annum, as filed by plaintiff against the defendants.
2. In brief, facts of the case as made out in the amended plaint are that plaintiff is the sole proprietor of proprietorship firm namely HG Strategic Consultancy and running the business of E-waste material like fridge, printer, LED/LCD, compressor, key board and supplying the same as per demand. It is stated that defendant no.1 is a partnership firm and operate its business through its partner Anil Chaudhary Potluri and Sayana Sai Brahmani i.e. defendant no.2 and 3 respectively. It is further stated that the line of works of defendants are of collecting e-waste material/damaged material and process the electronic waste and recycle or refurbish the same to make it useful. The defendants had incorporated two companies, one Pure Earth Recyclers Private Limited and another Pure Earth Refub Private Limited, but the second one was closed wherein the defendant no.2 was the director and approached the plaintiff and fixed the deal.
3. It is case of the plaintiff that defendant no. 2 had CS (Comm.) 59/2023 Harshad Gupta vs. M/s Green Waves Environmental Solutions and Ors. Page 2 of 13 Digitally signed by SANJEEV SANJEEV KUMAR KUMAR MALHOTRA MALHOTRA Date:
2024.10.29 15:41:54 +0530 approached the plaintiff and Vipin Kumar Upadhyay, representative of Vasudha Enviroaction LLP through Online and started chatting on Whatsapp and shown interest to look e-waste material physically and on 05.02.2022, a meeting for inspection of e-waste material at Khasra no.13,15/1, Thana Road, Karawal Nagar, Balaji Dharm Kanta, Delhi was fixed. It is stated that after inspection defendant no.2 and Pranesh Verma i.e. defendant no.4 took several photos of compressor e-waste, laptop etc. and convinced the plaintiff for supply of e-waste material and defendant no.2 also assured on behalf of defendant no.1 that bills will be cleared immediately, the moment it will be raised.
4. It is further case of the plaintiff that plaintiff started supply of e-waste material to the defendants and also received partial payment from the defendants, but thereafter defendants stopped making payment after receiving e-waste material. It is stated that as per ledger account of the plaintiff, a sum of Rs.5,12,308/- is due against the defendants for supplied e-waste material. It is further stated that several times plaintiff approached the defendants and requested to clear the dues but the defendants avoided the same on one or other pretext and defendants also issued cheques in favour of plaintiff, but same were bounced due to insufficient funds.
5. The plaintiff filed an application before mediation center for pre-institution mediation and a Non-Starter report dated 11.05.2023 was issued. Hence, the present suit.
6. Defendants contested the present suit by filing written CS (Comm.) 59/2023 Harshad Gupta vs. M/s Green Waves Environmental Solutions and Ors. Page 3 of 13 Digitally signed by SANJEEV SANJEEV KUMAR MALHOTRA KUMAR Date:
MALHOTRA 2024.10.29 15:41:59 +0530 statement while submitting that defendant company is an authorized E-waste recycler in Andhra Pradesh and is a zero waste management company which deals with flower waste, paper waste, coconut waste, fishing net etc. converting them into eco-friendly products i.e. dhup, sticks, soaps, candles, seed papers, seed pen, seed pencils, coconut key chains, coconut coffee cups, coconut phone stand etc. and serving in Telangana, Goa and Kerala since 2015. It is further submitted that plaintiff invited the defendant for guest lecture in e-waste management in the month of July, 2022 and after few months, on Whatsapp, plaintiff shared some photographs of e-waste material and both the parties mutually agreed for proper conversation of e-waste material. It is further submitted that in the month of February, 2022, defendant came to Delhi and visited the warehouse of plaintiff. It is further submitted that both the parties agreed to run the business in the field of e-waste of computer and its components and plaintiff started supplying the materials i.e. keyboards to the defendants and the defendants used to recycle it to extract useful material from the same. The understanding between the parties run smoothly until 12.02.2022, till then defendant cleared all the payments without any delay and thereafter defendant stopped the payment when the plaintiff supplied defective laptop e-waste inspite of showing the good laptops in the photographs sent through Whatsapp. It is submitted that due to said reason, the vehicle from which the material was transported was stranded at Delhi for three days as no buyers were interested to buy the said material and due to CS (Comm.) 59/2023 Harshad Gupta vs. M/s Green Waves Environmental Solutions and Ors. Page 4 of 13 Digitally signed SANJEEV by SANJEEV KUMAR KUMAR MALHOTRA MALHOTRA Date: 2024.10.29 15:42:03 +0530 this, defendant suffered huge loss and same was also intimated/communicated to the plaintiff, who promised to compensate the defendant.
7. On merits, the contents of plaint have been denied as wrong. It is admitted that plaintiff and defendants were having business relationship since 13.02.2022, which was closed/ended when plaintiff supplied waste laptops to the defendants on 17.02.2022. Thus, it is prayed that suit of plaintiff is liable to be dismissed.
8. Replication to the written statement of defendant was filed on behalf of plaintiff, wherein plaintiff denied the facts as mentioned in written statement while re-affirming the facts as mentioned in the plaint.
9. From the pleadings of the parties, following issues were framed vide order dated 20.01.2024:-
1. Whether plaintiff is entitled for a decree for sum of Rs.5,12,308/-? OPP
2. Whether plaintiff is entitled for any interest, if yes, at what rate and for which period? OPP
3. Whether plaintiff supplied defective laptop e-
waste inspite of showing the good laptops in the photographs sent through Whatsapp? OPD
4. Relief.
10. In support of his case, plaintiff examined himself as PW-1 and Mr. Vipin Kumar Upadhyay as PW-2. They both tendered their examination in chief by way of affidavit i.e. CS (Comm.) 59/2023 Harshad Gupta vs. M/s Green Waves Environmental Solutions and Ors. Page 5 of 13 Digitally signed by SANJEEV SANJEEV KUMAR KUMAR MALHOTRA MALHOTRA Date:
2024.10.29 15:42:08 +0530 Ex.PW1/A and Ex.PW2/A. PW-1 has relied upon following documents:-
(i) Ledger account of defendant i.e. Ex.PW1/1.
(ii) Copy of invoice dated 13.02.2022 i.e. Ex.PW1/2.
(iii) Copy of invoice dated 13.02.2022 i.e. Ex.PW1/3.
(iv) Copy of invoice dated 19.02.2022, e-way bill and receipts of Dharam Kanta i.e. Ex.PW1/4 (colly).
(v) Copy of Whatsapp chat/conversation between plaintiff and defendant no.2 i.e. from page no.19 to 58 i.e. Ex.PW1/5 (colly 40 pages).
(vi) Copy of Whatsap chat/conversation between plaintiff and defendant no.3 i.e. from page no.59 to 67 i.e. Ex.PW1/6 (colly 9 pages).
(vii) Copy of Whatsapp chat/conversation between plaintiff and defendant no.4 i.e. from page no.68 to 69 i.e. Ex.PW1/7 (colly 2 pages).
(viii) Photocopy of flight tickets of defendant no. 2 and 4 i.e. Mark A and B.
(ix) Copy of company/LLP Master Data of Pure Earth Recyclist Pvt. Ltd i.e. Mark C.
(x) Copy of bank statement of account of plaintiff i.e. Ex.PW1/8.
(xi) Copy of Adhaar Card and PAN Card i.e. Ex.PW1/9 (colly) (OSR)
(xii) Non-starter report i.e. Ex.PW1/10 (colly).
(xiii) Affidavit u/s 65-B of Indian Evidence Act i.e. Ex.PW1/11.
CS (Comm.) 59/2023 Harshad Gupta vs. M/s Green Waves Environmental Solutions and Ors. Page 6 of 13 Digitally signed by SANJEEV SANJEEV KUMAR
MALHOTRA
KUMAR Date:
MALHOTRA 2024.10.29
15:42:14
+0530
11. Defendants in support of their case examined Ms. Sayana Sai Brahmani as DW-1, who tendered her examination in chief by way of affidavit i.e. Ex.DW1/A.
12. Arguments have been advanced by Sh. Ankur Tripathi Ld. Counsel for plaintiff. None has appeared on behalf of defendants for advancing final arguments. I have given my thoughtful consideration to the submissions made by Ld. Counsel for plaintiff and also gone through the record. Issue no. 3 is taken on at first instance as its finding would also have effect on other issues. My issue wise findings are as under:-
Issue no.3
3. Whether plaintiff supplied defective laptop e-waste inspite of showing the good laptops in the photographs sent through Whatsapp? OPD
13. Onus to prove this issue was upon the defendants.
DW-1 Ms. Sayana Sai Brahmni in her affidavit of evidence Ex.DW1/A deposed that defendant no.1 company is an authorized e-waste recycler in Andhra Pradesh and is a zero waste management company and that in the month of February, 2022, defendant no.2 came to Delhi and visited the warehouse of the plaintiff and both the parties agreed to run the business in the field of e-waste of computer and its components. She further deposed that the understanding between plaintiff and defendant runs smoothly until 12.02.2022, however, the defendants stopped payment when the plaintiff supplied defective laptop e-waste inspite of showing the good laptops in the photographs sent through Whatsapp. As per affidavit of evidence of DW-1, CS (Comm.) 59/2023 Harshad Gupta vs. M/s Green Waves Environmental Solutions and Ors. Page 7 of 13 Digitally signed by SANJEEV SANJEEV KUMAR KUMAR MALHOTRA MALHOTRA Date:
2024.10.29 15:42:22 +0530 the defendants stopped payment when the plaintiff supplied defective laptop e-waste inspite of showing the goods laptops in the photographs sent through Whatsapp and due to the reason, the vehicle from which the material was transported was stranded at Delhi for three days as no buyers were interested to buy the said material. However, in her cross examination, DW-1 deposed that she does not know if the material supplied by plaintiff was sold at Delhi or taken to Andhra Pradesh and to a specific question, as put by Ld. Counsel for plaintiff, DW-1 deposed that she cannot affirm or deny that they sold the e-waste supplied by plaintiff on 13.02.2022 in Delhi itself. The claim of defendant is that the plaintiff supplied defective laptop e- waste inspite of showing the good laptops in the photographs through Whatsapp and on account of that they suffered huge loses but no fact is proved on record to show that the laptop/e-waste supplied by plaintiff were different from those which were shown to the defendants.
14. DW-1 admitted that they have not issued any legal notice to the plaintiff regarding any loss suffered by them on account of supply of defective laptop/e-waste by plaintiff or filed any counter claim. It is also admitted by DW-1 that they asked the plaintiff to compensate them regarding the supply of defective laptop and servers and therefore, payment of some other invoices remained pending. However, defendants have not disclosed how much of the e-waste material was defective and about the loss assessed by defendants with regard to alleged supply of defective laptop/e-waste. It is also admitted by DW-1 that CS (Comm.) 59/2023 Harshad Gupta vs. M/s Green Waves Environmental Solutions and Ors. Page 8 of 13 Digitally signed by SANJEEV SANJEEV KUMAR KUMAR MALHOTRA MALHOTRA Date:
2024.10.29 15:42:26 +0530 they were not authorized recycler and were having license for dismantling and that she does not know where they got dismantled the e-waste i.e. laptops. Thus, the defendants are neither aware whether the e-waste material i.e. laptops were sold on 13.02.2022 in Delhi or where they got dismantled the e-waste/laptops. There is no assessment of alleged damage caused to the defendants on account of sale of e- waste/laptop supplied by the plaintiff. In view thereof, it is held that defendants have failed to prove that plaintiff supplied defective laptop e-waste inspite of showing the good laptops in the photographs sent through Whatsapp. Accordingly, this issue is decided against the defendants and in favour of plaintiff.
Issue no.1
1. Whether plaintiff is entitled for a decree for sum of Rs.5,12,308/-? OPP
15. Onus to prove this issue was upon the plaintiff. PW-1 in his affidavit of evidence Ex.PW1/A deposed that plaintiff supplied the laptop e-waste to the defendants vide invoices Ex.PW1/2 to Ex.PW1/4 and the defendants in discharge of their liability made partial payment of Rs.21,20,000/- and as per ledger account Ex.PW1/1, a sum of Rs.5,12,308/- is still due against supplied e-waste material to the defendants as closing balance on 19.02.2022. The fact that payment of some invoices remained pending is admitted by DW-1 in her cross examination while deposing that they asked the plaintiff to compensate them regarding the supply of laptops and servers and therefore, payment of invoices is CS (Comm.) 59/2023 Harshad Gupta vs. M/s Green Waves Environmental Solutions and Ors. Page 9 of 13 Digitally signed by SANJEEV SANJEEV KUMAR MALHOTRA KUMAR Date:
MALHOTRA 2024.10.29 15:42:31 +0530 pending. DW-1 has also deposed in para no.8 of her affidavit of evidence that the defendant never refused to make payment to the plaintiff for the goods properly supplied and repeatedly requested that the plaintiff should also look in to the losses incurred by the defendants and in her cross examination, admitted that they offered the plaintiff to compensate through providing business from Kia motors and Pet bottles on the condition that they will adjust the amount and to accept that the material supplied to them was not upto mark to certain extent. Admittedly defendants have not issued any legal notice to the plaintiff regarding any loss suffered by them on account of any supply of e-waste by plaintiff or filed any counter claim, therefore, in absence of any specific evidence that the e- waste laptops were not up to mark, defendants cannot withheld the outstanding amount of plaintiff regarding supply of goods.
16. It is matter of record that plaintiff in para no.2 of the amended plaint has averred that defendant no.1 is a partnership firm and operate its dealing/business through its partner Anil Chaudhary Potluri/defendant no.2 and his wife Sayana Sai Brahmani/defendant no.3, which fact is not denied by the defendants in their written statement.
There is no averment in the plaint as to how the defendant no.4 is liable to pay the suit amount when he is not partner of the defendant no.1 firm. Therefore, defendant no.4 is not liable to pay any amount to the plaintiff.
17. The suit of plaintiff is also commercial in nature and CS (Comm.) 59/2023 Harshad Gupta vs. M/s Green Waves Environmental Solutions and Ors. Page 10 of 13 Digitally signed by SANJEEV SANJEEV KUMAR KUMAR MALHOTRA MALHOTRA Date:
2024.10.29 15:42:36 +0530 squarely falls within the purview of Section 2 (1) (c) of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015 and plaintiff has also duly complied with the mandatory provision of Pre-institution mediation and conciliation as provided in Section 12A of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015.
18. This court has territorial jurisdiction to try the present suit as part cause of action arose within the jurisdiction of this court as admittedly defendant no.2 visited the warehouse of the plaintiff in the month of February, 2022 to run the business in the field of e-waste of computer and its components as mentioned in affidavit of evidence of defendant i.e. Ex.DW1/A. This Court also has the pecuniary jurisdiction over the matter since the suit amount claimed by the plaintiff is more than the specified value of Rs.3 lacs of the Commercial Courts. As per ledger account Ex.PW1/1, the defendants made the last payment of Rs.9,00,000/- on 18.02.2022 and the present suit was filed on 07.06.2023 i.e. within the period of limitation.
19. The fact that defendants received the goods supplied by the plaintiff and the dues of all the invoices raised by plaintiff have not been cleared are not in dispute. Defendants have failed to prove that plaintiff supplied any defective laptop e-waste or that they suffered any loss or damage on account of said supply. As per ledger statement Ex.PW1/1, a sum of Rs.5,12,308/- is outstanding against the defendants. Thus, it is held that defendant no.1 being partnership firm and defendant no.2 and 3 being its partners are liable to pay the outstanding amount of CS (Comm.) 59/2023 Harshad Gupta vs. M/s Green Waves Environmental Solutions and Ors. Page 11 of 13 Digitally signed by SANJEEV SANJEEV KUMAR KUMAR MALHOTRA MALHOTRA Date:
2024.10.29 15:42:40 +0530 Rs.5,12,308/- to the plaintiff for the goods received by them. Accordingly, this issue is decided in favour of plaintiff and against the defendant no.1, 2 and 3.
Issue no.2
2. Whether plaintiff is entitled for any interest, if yes, at what rate and for which period? OPP
20. Onus to prove this issue was upon the plaintiff.
Plaintiff has claimed interest @ 18% per annum. However, there is no agreed rate of interest between the parties for any default made by the defendants in making the payment of invoices issued to him. Admittedly, the transactions between the parties are commercial in nature, therefore, as per Section 34 CPC, plaintiff is entitled to pendente lite and future interest at which moneys are lent by the nationalized bank in relation to commercial transactions i.e. @ 9% per annum from the date of filing of suit till realization. Accordingly, it is held that plaintiff is entitled to recover the suit amount i.e. Rs.5,12,308/- alongwith interest @ 9 % per annum from the defendant no. 1, 2 and 3 from the date of filing of suit till realization. Accordingly, this issue is decided in favour of plaintiff and against the defendant no.1, 2 and 3.
Relief
21. In view of my findings on aforementioned issues, the suit of plaintiff is decreed for a sum of Rs.5,12,308/- (Rupees Five Lac Twelve Thousand Three Hundred Eight Only) alongwith interest @ 9% per annum from the date of CS (Comm.) 59/2023 Harshad Gupta vs. M/s Green Waves Environmental Solutions and Ors. Page 12 of 13 Digitally signed by SANJEEV SANJEEV KUMAR KUMAR MALHOTRA MALHOTRA Date:
2024.10.29 15:42:47 +0530 filing of suit till realization in favour of plaintiff and against defendant no.1, 2 and 3. Costs of suit are also awarded in favour of plaintiff. Decree sheet be prepared accordingly.
22. File be consigned to Record Room.
Digitally signed by SANJEEV SANJEEV KUMAR KUMAR MALHOTRA MALHOTRA Date: 2024.10.29 Announced in the open court 15:42:52 +0530 on 29th October, 2024 (Sanjeev Kumar Malhotra) District Judge (Commercial Court) North-East District Karkardooma Courts, Delhi CS (Comm.) 59/2023 Harshad Gupta vs. M/s Green Waves Environmental Solutions and Ors. Page 13 of 13