Delhi District Court
M/S Paragon Industeries vs Satyam Polymers And Others on 9 May, 2025
IN THE COURT OF MS. PRIYANKA RAJPOOT,
SCJ-cum-RC, NORTH WEST DISTRICT,
ROHINI COURTS, DELHI
CS SCJ No. 337/21
CNR No. DLNW03-000410-2021
M/s Paragon Industries,
Through its Sole Proprietor
Sh. Arveen Gulati,
BA-81, Mangolpuri,
Industrial Area, Phase-II,
Delhi-110034 ......Plaintiff
Versus
1.Satyam Polymers Service to be affected through its partners Having Office at :
Satyam Polymers, Behind St. Paul School, Near RIICO Industrial Area, Dhoinda, Kankroli, Rajsthan
2. Chetan Kumawat Partner/Authorized Signatory Satyam Polymers, Behind St. Paul School, Near RIICO Industrial Area, Dhoinda, Kankroli, Rajasthan Also at :
Kumawat Mohalla, Mukhaji Chouraha, Kankroli, Dist. Rajsamand, Rajasthan
3. Kamlesh Kumawat Partner/Authorized Representative Satyam Polymers, Behind St. Paul School, Near RIICO Industrial Area, Digitally signed by PRIYANKA Dhoinda, Kankroli, Rajasthan PRIYANKA RAJPOOT RAJPOOT Date:
2025.05.13 CS SCJ No..337/21 M/s Paragon Industries v. Satyam Polymers & Ors. 1 of 6 13:24:46 +0530 Also at :
Kumawat Mohalla, Mukhaji Chouraha, Kankroli, Dist. Rajsamand, Rajasthan .....Defendants Date of Institution : 22.09.2021 Date of Reserving of Order : 09.04.2025 Date of Pronouncing Order : 09.05.2025 (clarifications were provided on 06.05.2025) SUIT FOR RECOVERY OF AMOUNT OF Rs.1,50,000/- Ex-parte Judgment
1. The brief facts of the case of are that the plaintiff is engaged in a business of manufacturing and supplying plastic goods and plastic raw material since 1994 and caters the needs of individuals, firms and companies.
2. Defendant no. 1 is a partnership firm and deals in manufacturing of water tanks and other plastic items. Defendants no. 2 and 3 are its partners.
3. In March, 2016, at the request of defendant no. 3, the plaintiff sent samples via courier to the defendants. Thereafter, on 08.06.2017, defendant no. 3 placed an order and promised the plaintiff to clear the dues after the delivery of the order dated 08.06.2017. The details of order are as follows : S.No. Quantity Particulars Rate Per Piece
1. 2600 Kg. Plastic Dana Rs. 104.5/Kg.
Digitally signed by
2. 650 Kg. Plastic Dana(2) Rs. 88/Kg. PRIYANKA PRIYANKA RAJPOOT RAJPOOT Date:
2025.05.13 13:25:03 CS SCJ No..337/21 M/s Paragon Industries v. Satyam Polymers & Ors. 2 of 6 +0530
3. 5900 Pcs. Plastic Lids Rs.57/Pcs.
4. 500 Kg. Plastic Dana(B) Rs. 95/Kg.
5. 500 Kg. Plastic Dana(A) Rs. 101/Kg.
4. The order dated 08.06.2017, vide bill serial no. 1025, book no. 21 for an total amount of Rs. 7,78,464/-, was dispatched on the same date i.e. 08.06.2017 by Deep Roadways vide bill no. 8993. The defendants issued Form-C to the plaintiff against the purchase made by the defendants.
5. Instead of paying the total due amount, the defendants paid the amount to the plaintiff against the purchased products in several installments as under:
Sl. No. Amount Date
1. Rs. 1,00,464/- 25.08.2017
2. Rs. 1,00,000/- 11.10.2017
3. Rs. 70,000/- 03.11.2017
4. Rs. 35,000/- 18.11.2017
5. Rs. 50,000/- 01.12.2017
6. Rs. 50,000/- 09.01.2018
7. Rs. 40,000/- 28.02.2018
8. Rs. 40,000/- 31.03.2018
9. Rs. 30,000/- 03.04.2018
10. Rs. 25,000/- 26.04.2018
11. Rs. 35,000/- 08.06.2018
12. Rs. 25,000/- 30.08.2018
13. Rs. 25,000/- 05.02.2019
Total = Rs. 6,25,464/-
Digitally
signed by
PRIYANKA
PRIYANKA RAJPOOT
RAJPOOT Date:
2025.05.13
13:25:12
+0530
CS SCJ No..337/21 M/s Paragon Industries v. Satyam Polymers & Ors. 3 of 6
6. Despite repeated requests and reminders, the defendants have not paid the outstanding amount after 05.02.2019. After adjusting the payment made by defendants, defendants were liable to pay Rs. 1,50,000/- to the plaintiff alongwith interest at the rate of 24% per annum till the payment is received.
7. On 23.12.2019, the plaintiff sent a legal notice through his counsel to the defendants. However, despite the service of the said legal notice, defendants have failed to make the payment. Hence, the present suit.
8. Record reveals that the defendants were served with the summons through WhatsApp on 02.11.2023. However, they did not appear before the court. Accordingly, vide order dated 19.02.2024, they were proceeded ex-parte.
9. The proprietor of the plaintiff's firm has examined himself as PW-1. To prove his case, he led evidence by way of affidavits Ex.PW1/A and Ex.PW1/B and relied upon the documents as under :-
S.No. Documents Exhibit No.
1. Copy of Aadhar Card Ex.PW1/1
2. Bill dated 08.06.2017 Ex.PW1/2
3. Goods consignment note dated Ex.PW1/3
08.06.2017
4. Copy of Central Sales Tax Declaration Ex.PW1/4 (colly.)
Forms dated 14.11.2017 and 06.12.2017 Digitally signed by PRIYANKA
5. Copy of ledger account of defendant no. Ex.PW1/5 PRIYANKA RAJPOOT RAJPOOT Date:
2025.05.13 13:25:36 +0530 CS SCJ No..337/21 M/s Paragon Industries v. Satyam Polymers & Ors. 4 of 6 1 in the books of the plaintiff
6. Copy of account statement of the Ex.PW1/6 (colly.) plaintiff's bank for the period 01.04.2016 to 14.12.2020
7. Copy of legal notice dated 23.12.2017 Ex.PW1/7
8. Original postal receipts Ex.PW1/8
9. Certificate u/s 65B of Indian Evidence Ex.PW1/9 Act
10. I have heard ex-parte final arguments of Ld. counsel for plaintiff and gone through the record.
11. The testimony of plaintiff remained unrebutted and uncontroverted as the defendants remained ex-parte during the trial. PW-1 deposed that on 08.06.2017, vide bill serial no. 1025, book no. 21, the plaintiff delivered goods for a total amount of Rs. 7,78,464/- and a sum of Rs.1,50,000/- is outstanding as principal. The said version of the plaintiff is substantiated by the documents placed on record including the invoice Ex. PW1/2, statement of account Ex.PW1/5 as well as bank account statement of the plaintiff Ex.PW1/6(colly.) which confirmed transactions between the parties.
12. There is no reason to disbelieve PW-1 and the documents tendered in evidence by him. The plaintiff has filed the suit within the period of limitation. The plaintiff is, thus, entitled to recovery the sum of Rs.1,50,000/- from the defendants. Digitally signed by PRIYANKA PRIYANKA RAJPOOT RAJPOOT Date:
2025.05.13 13:25:44 +0530 CS SCJ No..337/21 M/s Paragon Industries v. Satyam Polymers & Ors. 5 of 6
13. The plaintiff has sought pendente lite and future interest at the rate of 24% per annum on the due amount from the date of filing of the suit till its realization. However, the plaintiff is not entitled to interest which is in the form of terrorem, but is entitled to nominal interest at the rate of 9 % per annum from the date of filing of the suit till realization.
14. Thus, the suit of the plaintiff is decreed for the sum of Rs.1,50,000/- along with interest at the rate of 9% per annum from the date of filing of the suit till realization as well as cost. Decree sheet be prepared accordingly, subject to filing of the deficient Court Fee, if any.
PRIYANKA RAJPOOT
15. File be consigned to Record Room after due compliance.
Digitally signed by PRIYANKA RAJPOOT Date: 2025.05.13 13:25:53 +0530(Announced in the open Court) (PRIYANKA RAJPOOT) th 9 May, 2025 SCJ-cum-RC (NORTH-WEST) ROHINI COURTS/ DELHI CS SCJ No..337/21 M/s Paragon Industries v. Satyam Polymers & Ors. 6 of 6