Delhi District Court
Shree Bankey Behari Fabrics Private ... vs Rajender Kumar Saini Prop Sanex Garment on 11 December, 2025
THE COURT OF MS. KIRAN BANSAL
LD. DISTRICT JUDGE (COMM-02) : SHAHDARA
KARKARDOOMA COURTS: DELHI
CS (COMM) 46/ 2025
INDEX
SL. NO. HEADINGS PG. NO.
1.Memo of Parties 2 2. Plaint 3-5 3. Proceedings 5-6 4. Evidence 6 5. Analysis and Discussion 6-9 6. Relief 9 Digitally signed by KIRAN KIRAN BANSAL BANSAL Date: 2025.12.11 15:03:34 +0530 CS (COMM) 46/ 2025 Shree Bankey Behari Fabrics Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Rajender Kumar Saini Page No.1 of 9 In the matter of Shree Bankey Behari Fabrics Pvt. Ltd. IX/2884- 2885, Gurudwara Gali Gandhi Nagar, New Delhi- 31 Emal: [email protected] / [email protected] Mobile: 9958511611 Plaintiff VERSUS Rajender Kumar Saini Prop: Sanex Garment Shop No.: 1, H-16/680, Ground Floor, Gali No. 1, Half Govind Garh, Near Police Post, Tank Road, Karol Bagh, Behind Laxmi Cinema, Delhi- 110006 Mob.: 9718853805 Defendant Date of Institution 21.01.2025 Date of Hearing final arguments 08.12.2025 Date of conclusion 11.12.2025 Digitally signed by KIRAN KIRAN BANSAL Date: BANSAL 2025.12.11 15:03:41 +0530 CS (COMM) 46/ 2025 Shree Bankey Behari Fabrics Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Rajender Kumar Saini Page No.2 of 9 EX- PARTE JUDGEMENT
1. Vide this judgement, this court shall decide the present suit filed by the plaintiff against the defendant for recovery of Rs. 9,44,435/- along with costs, pendente lite and future interest @ 18% per annum.
THE PLAINT
2. It is submitted that the plaintiff is a company incorporated under Companies Act, 1956 and is engaged in the business of trading of wide range of fabrics for many years and has earned a reputation and goodwill in the market. It is submitted that the plaintiff is represented by Sh. Yatin Kumar who had been authorised by board of directors of the plaintiff company vide board resolution dated 18.10.2024.
3. On the other hand, it is submitted that the defendant is working under the name and style of M/s Sanex Garment and is engaged in the business is Denim Jeans manufacturing. It is stated that the defendant used to purchase the cotton fabrics/ denim from the plaintiff regularly on cash and credit basis. The details of the invoices have been set out in the plaint which is not repeated here for sake of brevity.
4. It is averred that the plaintiff has delivered/ supplied the said goods to the defendant from time to time against proper invoices. It is stated that the defendant never raised any complaint about the quality and quantity of the goods and was always satisfied with the goods delivered to him. It is submitted that plaintiff maintains a current, open and mutual account/ ledger account for KIRAN Digitally signed by KIRAN BANSAL BANSAL Date: 2025.12.11 15:03:49 +0530 CS (COMM) 46/ 2025 Shree Bankey Behari Fabrics Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Rajender Kumar Saini Page No.3 of 9 the materials supplied to the defendant and as per the said ledger account a sum of Rs. 9,44,435/- is outstanding and due on the defendant.
5. It is submitted that the defendant used to make part payments during the course of business dealings and the plaintiff has set out the details of the payment received by the defendant in the plaint which are not repeated here for sake of brevity. It is submitted that despite repeated requests by the plaintiff, the defendant failed to make the payment and thereafter, the plaintiff sent a legal notice to the defendant dated 28.10.2024.
6. It is submitted by the plaintiff that the subject matter of the dispute is a commercial dispute as defined under Section 2(1)(c) of The Commercial Courts Act, 2015, hence, the plaintiff complied with pre-institution mediation u/s 12A of the Commercial Courts Act. Thereafter, a non starter report was issued dated 12.13.2024.
7. As far as cause of action is concerned, it is submitted that the cause of action arose in favour of plaintiff and against the defendant when the plaintiff has supplied the goods to the defendant. It is also submitted that the cause of action also arose when the defendant made the part payment to the plaintiff during the course of proceedings. It is stated that cause of action further arose when the plaintiff sent a legal notice and also when the plaintiff complied with pre institution mediation and it further arose when the non starter report was issued on 13.12.2024. It is stated that the cause of action is still continuing and subsisting as the defendant has not paid the outstanding amount of Rs. 9,44,435/-
8. As far as the jurisdiction is concerned, the plaintiff states that the registered office of the plaintiff is situated within the territorial jurisdiction of this court and the defendant has placed orders at the registered office of the KIRAN Digitally signed by KIRAN BANSAL BANSAL Date: 2025.12.11 15:03:56 +0530 CS (COMM) 46/ 2025 Shree Bankey Behari Fabrics Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Rajender Kumar Saini Page No.4 of 9 plaintiff and the goods have been supplied to the defendant from the said office. Therefore, the present court has territorial jurisdiction to try this issue as part cause of action arose within the jurisdiction of present court.
9. It is submitted that the present suit is valued at Rs. 9,44,435/- and upon it court fees of Rs. 11,561/- is paid. Lastly, prayer has been made to pass a decree of money amounting to Rs. 9,44,435/- along with pendente lite and future interest @ 18% per annum in favour of plaintiff and award the cost of the suit in favour of plaintiff and against the defendant.
The plaint is signed, verified and supported by statement of truth of Sh. Yatin Kumar, AR of the plaintiff.
PROCEEDINGS
10. The present suit has been filed on 21.01.2025. Vide order dated 11.02.2025, summons were directed to issued to the defendant. It is also pertinent to mention here that vide order dated 26.03.2025, it was observed that summons sent through the defendant through process server were returned back unserved and speed post has also returned back unserved. However, summons sent to the whatsapp has been served but only summons were sent and the copy of plaint alongwith documents were not served. Thus, it was directed that the defendant be served afresh.
11. Vide order dated 06.05.2025, it was observed that the son of the defendant, who was physically present, has received the summons, however, copy of the plaint and document etc. was supplied on 06.05.2025. Thereafter, the defendant did not file the WS within the stipulated period of 30 days, thus, the right of the defendant to file the WS was closed and the defendant was proceeded ex parte vide order dated 18.08.2025.
Digitally signed by KIRANKIRAN BANSAL BANSAL Date:
2025.12.11 15:04:03 +0530 CS (COMM) 46/ 2025 Shree Bankey Behari Fabrics Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Rajender Kumar Saini Page No.5 of 9
12. During the course of proceedings, Sahil Sanini, son of defendant filed one application under Order I Rule 10 CPC seeking to implead him in the suit as the defendant. However, the said application was dismissed vide order dated 10.11.2025 and the matter was fixed for recording evidence.
EVIDENCE
13. The plaintiff in support of his case has examined Sh. Yatin Kumar, AR of the plaintiff, as PW-1 and tendered his evidence by way of affidavit Ex. PW1/A and has relied upon the following documents:
Copy of the Certificate of Incorporation as Ex.PW1/1(OSR); Copy of Board Resolution dt. 18.10.2024 as Ex.PW1/2(OSR); Original bills/invoices are Ex.PW1/3(Colly) (running into 24 to 58 total 35 pages);
Copy of the ledger account of the defendant in the books of plaintiff as Ex. PW1/4(Colly) (running into 59 to 66 total 8 pages); Office copy of the legal notice dt. 28.10.2024, postal receipt and the return envelope are Ex.PW1/5(Colly) (running into 67 to 70 total 3 pages);
Non-starter report dt. 13.12.2024 as Ex.PW1/6;
Certificate u/s 63 of BSA, 2023 as Ex.PW1/7;
Certificate by way of Affidavit under Order XI Rule 6(3) CPC as Ex.PW1/8.
14. The court has heard ld. counsel for the plaintiff and have also gone through the documents proved during evidence and testimony of PW1.
ANALYSIS AND DISCUSSION
15. The suit is commercial in nature and squarely falls within the purview of Section 2 (1) (C) of Commercial Courts Act and plaintiff has duly KIRAN Digitally signed by KIRAN BANSAL BANSAL 15:04:14 +0530 Date: 2025.12.11 CS (COMM) 46/ 2025 Shree Bankey Behari Fabrics Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Rajender Kumar Saini Page No.6 of 9 complied with mandatory provision of Pre-Institution Mediation and Conciliation as provided in Section 12 A of Commercial Courts Act and also Non Starter Report Ex.PW1/6 was issued.
16. As far as the limitation is concerned, the perusal of the invoices (Ex. PW-1/3) reveals that the last invoice is dated 24.05.2022 and the same corresponds to the Ledger account of the defendant (Ex. PW-1/4). The period from 12.11.2024 to 13.12.2024 is liable to be excluded in computing the period of limitation being the time consumed in complying with Pre- Institution Mediation as per Section 12A of the Commercial Courts Act. The period of limitation for filing the present suit is three years. Therefore, the present suit filed on 21.01.2025 is filed within the period of limitation.
17. As far as the territorial jurisdiction is concerned, the defendant has placed purchase orders on the plaintiff within the jurisdiction of this court and the orders were dispatched, as per invoices (Ex. PW-1/3), from the territorial jurisdiction of this court. Moreover, perusal of the invoices reveals that payment was to be made at the bank account of plaintiff maintained at ICICI Bank, Gandhi Nagar Branch which is within the territorial jurisdiction of this court. Therefore, the present court has territorial jurisdiction to try this suit on the basis of principle of 'Debtor seeks creditor'.
18. The defendant, being ex parte, has not filed his written statement along with statement of truth, affidavit of admission and denial of documents as well as its own documents within the stipulated period of 30 days from its service and even upto 120 days from the date of his service along with an application for condonation of delay.
19. The plaintiff has duly proved the invoices Ex. PW-1/3 (colly) during his evidence. The invoices are also supported by certificate under KIRAN Digitally signed by KIRAN BANSAL BANSAL 15:04:22 +0530 Date: 2025.12.11 CS (COMM) 46/ 2025 Shree Bankey Behari Fabrics Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Rajender Kumar Saini Page No.7 of 9 Section 63 of The Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam (Ex. PW-1/7) and affidavit under Order XI Rule 6(3) CPC (Ex. PW-1/8). All these Invoices i.e. Ex.PW1/4 (colly) finds mentioned in the Ledger Account Ex.PW1/5 along with numbers and their amounts on the debit side of the ledger Ex.PW1/5.
20. Moreover, all the invoices (Ex. PW-1/3) bears the receiving/ signature of son of the defendant who has accepted the goods on behalf of the defendant. Therefore, the delivery of the goods stand duly proved by the signatures acknowledging receipt of goods contained on the invoices.
21. The plaintiff has also duly proved the ledger account (Ex. PW-1/4) which shows that a total of Rs. 9,44,435/- is outstanding against the defendant. The averments made in the plaint (which is supported with the affidavit and statement of truth) remain uncontroverted, unrebutted and unchallenged and can be presumed to be admitted as correct, as the defendant neither appeared before the court, nor filed his written statement along with statement of truth, affidavit of admission and denial of documents of the plaintiff and failed to file his own documents as well as any application for condonation of delay within the stipulated period from the date of his service. The defendant has failed to contest the case or put up any defence.
22. The testimony of PW-1 remains uncontroverted, unrebutted and unchallenged. There is no reason to disbelieve the testimony of PW-1 who has reiterated, reasserted and reaffirmed all the facts, as elaborated in the plaint. All the relevant documents and relevant averments have been proved in the evidence and affidavit of Sh. Yatin Kumar, AR of the plaintiff Company (PW-1).
23. Thus, the plaintiff is entitled to principal amount of Rs. 9,44,435/- from the defendant.
Digitally signed by KIRANKIRAN BANSAL BANSAL Date:
2025.12.11 15:04:29 +0530 CS (COMM) 46/ 2025 Shree Bankey Behari Fabrics Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Rajender Kumar Saini Page No.8 of 9
24. As far as the interest in concerned, the plaintiff has not bifurcated the pre-suit interest in compliance of Order VII Rule 2A CPC and neither has paid court fees upon it. Thus, it seems that the plaintiff has foregone his claim of the pre-suit interest and therefore, pre-suit interest is not awarded to the plaintiff.
25. The plaintiff has claimed pendente lite and future interest @ 18% p.a. It is submitted that invoices provides for such a rate of interest. It is a settled law that such unilaterally appended terms of invoice are not binding and there was no agreement between the parties to charge such exorbitant rate of interest. Thus, pendente lite and future interest can not be awarded @ 18% p.a. However, the plaintiff has proved that he is entitled to the above said principal amount, therefore, plaintiff is entitled to reasonable rate of interest @ 9% pa on the principal amount of Rs. 9,44,435/-.
Relief:
26. In view of the discussion, the suit of the plaintiff is decreed in favour of the plaintiff and against the defendant and it is directed that plaintiff is entitled to an amount of Rs. 9,44,435/- from the defendant as principal amount along with interest @ 9% per annum on the principal amount of Rs. 9,44,435/- from 21.01.2025 till its realization. Cost of the suit to the extent of court fees and Rs.50,000/- as litigation cost is also awarded to the plaintiff as per law. Decree Sheet be prepared accordingly. File be consigned to Record Room.
Digitally signed by KIRANKIRAN BANSAL Date:
BANSAL 2025.12.11 15:04:36 +0530 Announced in the open court (Kiran Bansal) on 11.12.2025 District Judge, Commercial Court-02 Shahdara, Karkardooma Delhi/11.12.2025 CS (COMM) 46/ 2025 Shree Bankey Behari Fabrics Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Rajender Kumar Saini Page No.9 of 9