Bangalore District Court
M/S Matrix Cellular (International) vs Shri Subhas Melli on 29 August, 2015
Before the Court of XII Additional Small Causes at
Bangalore
(SCCH-8)
Present: Shri P.J. Somashekar B.A., LL.B.,
XII Additional Small Causes Judge,
Bangalore.
Dated this the 29th day of August 2015
S.C.No.783/2015
Plaintiff M/s Matrix Cellular (International)
Services Private Limited, a company
registered under the Companies Act,
1956 and having its Branch Office at
No.95, 17th B Main Road,
Koramangala, Bengaluru-560 095.
Represented by its Executive,
Mr.Uday Kumar K.
(Shri Kashyap N.Naik, Advocate)
V/s.
Defendant Shri Subhas Melli,
Residing at H.No.309,
Kagalgomb Taluk,
Badami,
Bagalkot-587 117.
(Exparte)
Date of institution of the suit: 9.7.2015
Nature of the suit (suit on pronote,
2 SCCH-8 SC 783/2015
suit for declaration and possession
suit for injunction etc.): Recovery of money
Date of commencement of
recording of the evidence: 28.8.2015
Date on which the judgment
is pronounced : 29.8.2015
Total duration: Years Month/s Days
0 1 20
XII Addl.Judge
JUDGMENT
This is a suit filed by the plaintiff company against the defendant for recovery of money of Rs.8,844.69/- with future interest at 18% p.a. from the date of suit till its realisation.
2. The brief facts of the plaint are as under:
The plaintiff company carrying its business of International Mobile Connections in the name and style 3 SCCH-8 SC 783/2015 of Matrix Cellular (International) Services in its plaint has alleged that the defendant had applied for International Mobile Connection in Bengaluru and procured the Standard application form containing the terms and conditions regarding the usage of the said connection. After being satisfied about the terms and conditions the defendant has agreed to hire a mobile connection and categorically stated that he has read and understood the terms and conditions of the agreement form and agreed to abide by the said conditions. Thereafter several bills were raised on the basis of the defendant's usage. Inspite of several requests and demands, the defendant has failed to pay a sum of Rs.8,844.69/-.
3.The plaintiff company in its plaint further alleged that he has got issued a legal notice dated 9.9.2014 u/s 138 of N.I. Act and the said notice was duly served on the defendant calling upon him for payment of the due 4 SCCH-8 SC 783/2015 amount with interest at the rate of 18% p.a. and he was unable to initiate the proceedings u/s 138 of N.I. Act. The defendant has not chosen to reply the said notice nor complied the demand of the plaintiff company. The defendant is obligated for the services rendered by the plaintiff company. Thereby the plaintiff company has constrained to file the instant suit against the defendant.
4. The cause of action for the suit which arose on 4.9.2011 when the defendant has entered into the agreement for providing international mobile connection and the defendant has become due and failed to pay the bills and on 9.9.2014 on which date the legal notice was got issued within the jurisdiction of this court and prays for decree the suit.
5. In response of the suit summons, the defendant did not appear nor file his written statement as he was placed ex-parte.
5 SCCH-8 SC 783/2015
6. The plaintiff company in order to prove the plaint averments has examined its Authorised Signatory, as P.W.1 and got marked the documents as Ex.P1 to P9 and plaintiff company has not examined any witness in its favour.
7. Heard the arguments on plaintiff's side.
8. The points that arise for court consideration are as under:
1) Whether the plaintiff company is entitled for the relief as prayed for?
2) What order or decree?
9. My answer to the above points are as under:
Point No.1: In the affirmative.
Point No.2: As per final order
for the following:
6 SCCH-8 SC 783/2015
REASONS
10. Point No.1:
It is the specific case of the plaintiff company that the plaintiff company carrying its business of International Mobile Connections in the name and style of Matrix Cellular (International) Services Private Limited. Has approached the court on the ground that the defendant had applied for international mobile connection in Bengaluru and procured the Standard application form containing the terms and conditions regarding the usage of the said connection and the defendant has agreed to hire the mobile connection and signed the agreement and though he has utilised the usage of the said mobile connection, but he did not pay Rs.8,844.69/- inspite of repeated requests and demands made by the company. Now the defendant is due a sum of Rs.8,844.69/- and he is also liable to pay interest at 7 SCCH-8 SC 783/2015 the rate of 18% p.a. Thereby the plaintiff company has filed the instant suit against the defendant.
11.The plaintiff company in order to prove the plaint averments has examined its Authorised Signatory as PW1. The PW1 has filed his affidavit as his chief- examination in which has stated that the plaintiff company carrying its business of International Mobile Connections in the name and style of Matrixz Celular (International) Services Private Limited and the defendant had applied for International Mobile Connection in Bengaluru and procured the Standard application form containing the terms and conditions regarding the usage of the said connection. After being satisfied about the terms and conditions the defendant has agreed to hire a mobile connection and signed the statement after read over the terms and conditions of the agreement form. Though the defendant has utilised the said mobile 8 SCCH-8 SC 783/2015 connection but failed to pay the due for Rs.8,844.69/-, inspite of several requests and demands did not pay the due amount. So, the plaintiff company got issued a legal notice to the defendant calling upon him for payment of the said due amount. Now, the defendant is liable to pay a due amount of Rs.8,844.69 and liable to pay interest at the rate of 18%.p.a. though the summons was served on the defendant, but inspite of summons did not appear nor to file the written statement as he was placed exparte.
12. The plaintiff company in support of the oral evidence has produced the documents marked as Ex.P1 to Ex.P9. So Ex.P1 to Ex.P9 are clear that the defendant has applied for international mobile connection and executed the agreement form by accepting the terms and conditions of the plaintiff company. Ex.P4 to Ex.P7 reflects that the defendant has utilised the said mobile 9 SCCH-8 SC 783/2015 connection and due for Rs.8,844.69/- Ex.P8 & Ex.P9 reflects that the plaintiff company has got a issued legal notice to the defendant to calling upon him for payment of the due amount, but the defendant did not pay the due amount. Thereby the plaintiff has filed the instant suit against the defendant. If at all the defendant has not utilised the mobile connection from the plaintiff company he would have appear and resisted the claim of the plaintiff company, but the defendant in spite of service of summons did not appear nor chosen to file the written statement. That itself is clear that the defendant had applied for international mobile connection in Bengaluru and procured the standard customer agreement form containing the terms and conditions regarding the usage of the said connection, after being satisfied by the terms and conditions has signed the form and used the mobile connection and he has due for 10 SCCH-8 SC 783/2015 Rs.8,844.69. So, considering the transaction in between the plaintiff company and the defendant it is just and necessary to grant interest at the rate of 16% p.a. instead of 18% it will meet the ends of justice. The plaintiff company has proved its case through oral and documentary evidence that the defendant has took the international mobile connection, though he has used the mobile connection, but did not pay the amount of Rs.8,844.69 inspite of repeated requests and demands and the defendant is due a sum of Rs.8,844.69 with interest. Hence, I am of the opinion that the point No.1 is in the Affirmative.
13. Point No.2:
In view of my answer to the point No.1, I proceed to pass the following:11 SCCH-8 SC 783/2015
ORDER The suit of the plaintiff company is decreed with costs.
The defendant is hereby directed to pay the decreetal amount of Rs.8,844.69/- with interest at the rate of 16% p.a. to the plaintiff company from the date of suit till its realization.
Draw decree accordingly. Dictated to the stenographer, transcript thereof, corrected by me and then pronounced in the open court on this the 29th day of August 2015.
(P.J.Somashekar), XII Addl. Small Causes Judge, Bangalore.
ANNEXURE List of the witnesses examined on behalf of plaintiffs:
PW1 Sri Udaya Kumar K. 29.8.2015 12 SCCH-8 SC 783/2015 List of the documents exhibited on behalf of plaintiffs:
Ex.P1 Customer Agreement form Ex.P2 Board Resolution copy Ex.P3 Authorisation letter Ex.P4 Bill copy Ex.P5 Ledger copy Ex.P6 Bill Ex.P7 Ledger copy Ex.P8 Notice copy Ex.P9 Postal receipt
List of the witnesses examined on behalf of defendants:
None List of the documents marked on behalf of defendants:
Nil (P.J. Somashekar), XII Addl. Small Causes Judge, Bangalore.