Delhi District Court
M/S 123 Ply vs M/S Myung Moon Interiors on 7 April, 2015
IN THE COURT OF Ms. JYOTI KLER, ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE
CUMJUDGE SMALL CAUSE COURTCUM GUARDIAN JUDGE, SOUTH
EAST DISTRICT, SAKET COURT COMPLEX, NEW DELHI
CS No: 20/14
Case ID No. 02406C0004922014
IN THE MATTER OF :
M/s 123 Ply,
Through its Proprietor
Sh. Vijay Garg,
Having its Office at:
Z42, Okhla Industrial Area,
Phase - II, New Delhi 110020 .....Plaintiff
VERSUS
M/s Myung Moon Interiors
Exteriors Pvt. Ltd.
Through its Director / Authorized Representative
Having its office at:
A2/41, Safdarjung Enclave,
New Delhi. .....Defendants
Date of Institution: 09.01.2014
Date of Final Arguments: 07.04.2015
Date of Judgment: 07.04.2015
Decision: Decreed
SUIT FOR RECOVERY
EX PARTE JUDGMENT
1.Plaintiff is a proprietorship concern of Sh. Vijay Garg dealing in the sale of wooden raw material like practical board, MDF, laminate merino, Laminates Greenlam, PVT Tape, Pin Board, Ply and other materials. Defendant is CS 20/14 M/s 123 Ply Vs. M/s Myung Moon Interiors Exteriors Pvt. Ltd. 1/3 a private limited company dealing in the filed of interior designing work.
2. It is averred that the defendant approached the plaintiff for purchase of raw material /particle board on credit basis. It undertook to pay for the goods within a span of 5 days from delivery. Defendant used to place oral purchase orders and plaintiff supplied goods from time to time on credit basis, as agreed. Plaintiff maintained an account of the defendant company in ordinary course of business. Goods worth Rs.17,84,495/ were supplied by the plaintiff to the defendant from time to time. Defendant paid a sum of Rs.16,17,540/ as per account statement. Time was sought for remaining payment of Rs.1,66,955/ but it was not paid despite repeated reminders. Hence, the present suit.
3. Summons of the Suit under Order XXXVII CPC were sent to the defendant and the defendant was served by way of affixation but it failed to appear despite service. Vide order dated 13.11.2014 the Suit was converted into an ordinary Suit for Recovery. The defendant was proceeded exparte vide the same order.
4. Plaintiff examined its AR Sh. Vijay Garg as PW1 by way of affidavit Ex. PW1/1. He reiterated the contents of the plaint in the affidavit and relied upon the following documents:
a) Ex.PW1/A (colly): Copies of seven invoices.
b) Ex.PW1/B: Statement of account maintained in the
ordinary course of business.
c) Ex.PW1/C (colly): Office copy of the legal notice
dated 06.11.2013 along with postal receipt.
5. The oral testimony of PW1 is in consonance with the documents proved on record. The defendant being exparte, PW1 was not crossexamined, and his testimony has thus remained unrebutted and unchallenged. CS 20/14 M/s 123 Ply Vs. M/s Myung Moon Interiors Exteriors Pvt. Ltd. 2/3
6. Invoices and statement of account reflect all the transactions that occurred between the parties. Foot of the account reflects balance of Rs.1,66,955/ due from and payable by the defendant. The statement of account is unrebutted and Court has no reason to disbelieve the same. Defendant did not appear and present its defence.
7. Considering the cogent and reliable evidence led by the plaintiff, I am of the opinion that the Suit deserves to be decreed. Accordingly, Suit of the plaintiff is decreed against the defendant in a sum of Rs. 1,66,955/ along with pendente lite interest @ 9% per annum and future interest @ 6% per annum (there being no agreed rate of interest). Costs of the suit is also awarded in favour of the plaintiff and against the defendant.
8. Decreesheet be prepared accordingly.
9. File be consigned to recordroom.
Announced in the open court.
On 07.04.2015 (JYOTI KLER)
ASCJ/JSCC /Gdn.JUDGE
SOUTHEAST, SAKET COURTS, NEW DELHI
CS 20/14 M/s 123 Ply Vs. M/s Myung Moon Interiors Exteriors Pvt. Ltd. 3/3