Bangalore District Court
M/S.Sadguru Screens vs M/S. Lalithasree Graphics on 29 September, 2018
IN THE COURT OF XL ADDL.CITY CIVIL &
SESSIONS JUDGE (CCH-41) AT BENGALURU.
Dated this the 29th day of September 2018.
:PRESENT:
SRI.RAVINDRA. M. JOSHI,
M.A., LL.B. (Spl.)
XL Addl.City Civil & Sessions Judge, Bengaluru.
O.S.NO.4827 / 2017
PLAINTIFF: M/S.SADGURU SCREENS,
No.113/2, 60 ft. Road, 4th Stage,
Industrial Town, Rajajinagar,
Bengaluru-560 044.
Represented by its Proprietor-
Sri.D.S.Nadger.
(By Sri.M.V.Hiremath, Advocate.)
AND:
DEFENDANT: M/S. LALITHASREE GRAPHICS,
No.4321, 1st Cross, 14th Main Road,
Subramanya Nagar,
Bengaluru-560 021.
Represented by its Proprietor -
Sri.Sridhar.
(Exparte.)
***
i) Date of Institution of the 17.07.2017
suit.
ii) Nature of the suit. Money Suit.
iii) Date of the
commencement of recording 03.04.2018
of evidence.
iv) Date on which the
judgment was pronounced. 29-09-2018
v) Total Duration Years Months Days
01 02 12
OS.4827/2017
JUDGMENT
The plaintiff has filed this suit against the defendant directing the defendant to pay an amount of Rs.6,44,035/- along with interest of 18% from October 2016 till the date of actual payment.
.2. It is the case of the plaintiff that it is a Proprietary concern involved in carrying out the business in printing and supplying of printing materials after taking the orders from the needy persons. As such, the plaintiff has established its name in the printing technology and its allied services in Bengaluru city. The defendant is also a proprietary concern to the plaintiff for last many years and he used to place orders to supplying Toyota Shubharam Booklet with colour printing with L/M, punching, pasting and cutting etc., regularly. On the basis of indent / order given by defendant, plaintiff used to supply the printed materials as per the agreed quotation rates between the parties. There are certain instances where the defendants used to supply the materials so as to get printed the design given by him. In such circumstances, plaintiff used OS.4827/2017 to charge only printing charges excluding material charges. There was no such hindrance in the transaction with regards to payment of bills for work being carried out by plaintiff. It is to be noticed that defendant has placed orders for printing and supply of Toyota Shubharam Booklet with colour printing with L/M, punching, pasting and cutting vide following Invoices:
i) Invoice No.SS/1173/2016-17 dated 26.09.2016 for 4,976 Nos. @ Rs.40/- each amounting to Rs.2,09,987.20 (inclusive of VAT).
ii) Invoice No.SS/1522/2016-17 dated 16.11.2016 for 4,875 Nos. @ Rs.40/- each amounting to Rs.2,05,725/-(inclusive of VAT).
iii) Invoice No.SS/1901/2016-17 dated 24.12.2016 for 5,137 Nos. @ Rs.40/- each amounting to Rs.2,16,781/- (inclusive of VAT).
iv) Invoice No.SS/1350/2016-17 dated 24.10.2016 amounting to Rs.4,326/-.
v) Invoice No.SS/1398/2016-17 dated 29.10.2016 amounting to Rs.7,216/-.
Total amount is Rs.6,44,035.20. It is submitted that out of the above mentioned five items, only printing charges was charged against Item Nos.2 & 3 for which the materials were supplied by the defendant. The rest of the items are charged inclusive of materials cost. It is also OS.4827/2017 submitted that as per requirement and order placed by defendant, plaintiff has delivered the goods and defendant has taken delivery after having signed the delivery Challan on 16.11.2016. After having supplied the required quantity of materials as per invoices, defendant has received the printing materials without any complaints. Thereafter, plaintiff has submitted bills to the tune of Rs.6,44,035.20 for the payment. The defendant has received the bills submitted by the plaintiff for the said amount. The above factor can be seen from e-Sugama Form as provided under Sub Section 2(a) of Section 53 R/w Rule 157(1)(a) of the Department of Commercial Taxes. Despite having received the printing materials from the plaintiff and bills submitted by plaintiff, defendant has not come forward to pay the bill amount without there being any impediment on the part of plaintiff. As a result of which the defendant has caused a breach of the terms of contract entered while placing orders for supply of printing materials. There was an understanding inter se between the parties and there is a mutual Agreement while placing orders for the supply of printing materials OS.4827/2017 that plaintiff has to submit the bills after having supplied the printing materials. The defendant has to pay the bill amount as claimed by the plaintiff. When the defendant has received materials as per his order, the invoices, has signed the delivery Challans after having received the materials without any complaints, now the defendant has to pay the bill amount as claimed by the plaintiff. Instead of doing so, defendant has kept mum. It is further submitted that there are several conversations inter se between the parties wherein the plaintiff has demanded the payment of bill amount on many occasion. In the said process, defendant used to inform him that he would pay shortly. However, defendant did not pay the bill amount so far. Noticing such attitude of defendant, plaintiff has issued a legal notice calling upon the defendant to pay the bill amount within a period of 10 days from the date of receipt of notice. The defendant though received the notice has not replied so far. Hence, it is constraint to file the present suit for the recovery of the bill amount. Cause of action accrues on 28.03.2017 for the first time when defendant expressed his unwillingness to pay the bill OS.4827/2017 amount. Thereafter, plaintiff has issued Legal Notice dated 05.04.2017.
.3. In pursuance of suit summons, defendant fails to appear before the Court and hence, defendant is placed exparte.
.4. To prove and substantiate the case, the Proprietor of plaintiff examined as PW.1 and got marked in all 12 documents at Ex.P.1 to Ex.P.12.
.5. Heard arguments.
.6. On going through the pleadings, evidence of oral and documents, in the light of submission of the plaintiff counsel, the points that arisen for consideration of this Court are:
1. Whether the plaintiff proves the transaction between itself and defendant as claimed?
2. Whether the plaintiff proves that the defendant is liable to pay an amount of Rs.6,44,035.20 with interest at the rate of 18% p.a. from October, 2016 as claimed?
OS.4827/2017
3. Whether plaintiff is entitled for the reliefs sought?
4. What Order or Decree?
.7. The above points are answered for reasons, findings given in the foregoing discussions on Points No.1 to 3 as per final order.
REASONS .8. POINTS NO.1 TO 3: As these Points are interconnected, as such, they are taken up jointly for consideration.
.9. It is contended by the plaintiff that the plaintiff is Proprietorship concern doing business in printing and supply of printing materials. The defendant is also a proprietary concern known to plaintiff and the defendant used to place orders for supply of Toyota Shubhrang Booklet with color printing with L/M, punching, pasting and cutting. On the basis of order placed by the defendant concern, plaintiff used to supply the materials. The plaintiff also contended that whenever the defendant concern supplied materials, it will only print and supply those OS.4827/2017 materials by charging printing charges only. The plaintiff contended that the defendant concern is due of Rs.6,44,035.20. The defendant though received the materials from plaintiff, but has not made payment, therefore, plaintiff got issued notice calling upon defendant to pay the amount due. Inspite of receiving notice, defendant fails to pay the due amount.
.10. In this case, the defendant has not appeared and contested the claim though it has been served with summons. The plaintiff to substantiate the contention adduced evidence of its Proprietor as PW.1 and got marked in all 12 documents. PW.1 filed affidavit in lieu of chief-examination by reiterating averments made out in the plaint. The evidence of PW.1 is not shaken by the defendant by way of cross-examination. The evidence is intact. Further to support the evidence, plaintiff produced Delivery Challan, Tax invoices, Notice copy, Postal Receipt, Acknowledgment Card. On perusal of the documents, it goes to show that the defendant has received the materials covered under Delivery Challan dated 16.11.2016 OS.4827/2017 (Ex.P.2), The Tax Invoices (Exs.P.3 to7) goes to show plaintiff raised Tax Invoices in respect of supply of materials to defendant. On considering these Tax Invoices and copy of the Delivery Challan goes to show the plaintiff supplied the materials and raised Tax Invoices. These documents are not disputed or questioned by defendant. .11. The plaintiff contended that though it has supplied the materials covered in Delivery Challan and Tax Invoices to defendant and defendant has received those materials has not paid the bills. It is contended that the defendant is liable to pay Rs.6,44,035.20. The plaintiff also contended that the defendant is liable to pay interest on this amount at the rate of 18% p.a. from October, 2016. As the defendant fails to pay the amount, plaintiff issued notice on 05.04.2017, 03.07.2018 and produced Postal Receipt, Acknowledgment Card. On perusal of these documents, it reveals that there is no document except copy of the notice dated 05.04.2017 to consider the fact that this notice reached the defendant or not. Further the notice dated 03.07.2018 has been served on defendant, it OS.4827/2017 can be evidenced from receipt and Acknowledgment Card. The defendant has not replied to this notice. The plaintiff has not claimed liability of defendant in paying interest on the claimed amount in the notice.
.12. On considering the materials on record, this Court finds that plaintiff by pleading and giving evidence of oral and producing documentary evidence has established that it has supplied Toyota Shubhram Booklet with color printing, with punching, ,pasting and cutting, etc., to defendant. Further the plaintiff shown that the defendant is liable to pay Rs.6,44,035.20 for receiving those materials. Inspite of demand made by plaintiff, the defendant fails to pay the amount or replied to said demand of the plaintiff. Since plaintiff shown that the defendant is due of the amount mentioned above for supply of printing materials and defendant fails to make the payment of the due amount is entitled for decree for recovery of said amount. However, the plaintiff is not entitled for interest from October, 2016 as claimed. Therefore, for these reasons, Point No.1 is answered in OS.4827/2017 the affirmative and Points 2 and 3 in partly affirmative.
.13. POINT NO.4: In the result, this Court proceeds to pass the following:
ORDER Suit is decreed in part with costs.
The plaintiff is entitled to recover Rs.6,44,035.20 with interest at the rate of 18% p.a. from the date of suit till its realization.
Draw decree accordingly.
(Dictated to the Judgment Writer, computerized by her and corrected, revised, signed and then pronounced by me in the open Court on this the 29th day of September 2018.) (RAVINDRA. M. JOSHI) XL Addl. City Civil & Sessions judge, Bengaluru.
ANNEXURE WITNESSES EXAMINED ON BEHALF OF PLAINTIFF:
PW.1 - D.S.Nadgir S/o. Sri.S.Nadgir.
OS.4827/2017 DOCUMENTS PRODUCED ON BEHALF OF PLAINTIFF:
Ex.P.1 : Certificate issued by Directorate of Industries & Commerce. Ex.P.2 : Copy of Delivery Challan dated 16.11.2016. Ex.P.3 to Tax Invoices. Ex.P.7 :
Ex.P.8 : Ledger Extract.
Ex.P.9 to Copy of Notice dated 05.04.2017,
Ex.P.12 03.07.2018, Postal Receipt & Postal
Acknowledgment Card.
WITNESSES EXAMINED ON BEHALF OF
DEFENDANT:
-NIL-
DOCUMENTS PRODUCED ON BEHALF OF
DEFENDANT:
-NIL-
(RAVINDRA. M. JOSHI)
XL Addl. City Civil & Sessions Judge, Bengaluru.
OS.4827/2017 29.09.2018 P - MVH, D- Exparte, (Judgment pronounced in the open For Judgment. Court vide separate order.) ORDER Suit is decreed in part with costs.
The plaintiff is entitled to recover Rs.6,44,035.20 with interest at the rate of 18% p.a. from the date of suit till its realization.
Draw decree accordingly.
XL.ACC & SJ Bengaluru.
OS.4827/2017