Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

Delhi District Court

Sunil Sabharwal (Proprietor) vs Hind Agro Industries Ltd on 13 December, 2022

        IN THE COURT OF Ms. VINEETA GOYAL:
      DISTRICT JUDGE (COMMERCIAL COURT)-02
   SOUTH-EAST DISTRICT, SAKET COURT, NEW DELHI

CS (Comm.) 747/2022

SUNIL SABHARWAL (Proprietor)
M/s Trishul Enterprises
E-134, Kalkaji, New Delhi-110019                                            ....Plaintiff

                        VERSUS
HIND AGRO INDUSTRIES LTD
Through its Directors
B-3, Friends Colony (West),
New Delhi-110065                                                           ....Defendant

                 Date of Institution      :                          29.07.2022
                 Date of final argument :                            07.12.2022
                 Date of Judgment         :                          13.12.2022

Appearance :           Sh. Harish Malik and Sh. Kushal
                       Bhattacharjee, Ld. Counsel for the plaintiff.
                       None for the defendant.

                                JUDGMENT

1. The present suit is filed as summary suit under Order XXXVII Rule 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (hereinafter called as CPC) to recover a sum of Rs. 4,46,168/- (Rupees Four Lakhs Fourty Six Thousand One Hundred Sixty Eight only) towards principal amount and interest @ 12% from 31.01.2021 till 01.07.2022 with future interest till payment against the defendant.

2. The plaintiff's case is that he is proprietor of M/s Trishul Enterprises and is engaged in the business of Automotive, Industrial Lubricants and Greases. The defendant is involved in the business of meat processing as well as is a supplier and exporter of meat products. Between 01.04.2015 to 31.03.2018, the defendant placed orders for which various invoices aggregating Rs. 1,99,798/- were raised. The defendant re-paid an aggregate amount of Rs. 9,53,630/- towards principal amount. The defendant on 22.10.2020 had admitted the liability of Rs. 4,96,268/- as evident from confirmation of account. The last payment towards the principal amount was of a sum of Rs. 50,000/- on 36.01.2021 leaving a balance of Rs. 4,46,168/-. A legal notice dated 21.12.2021 were sent calling upon the defendant to pay the principal amount alongwith interest, however, the defendant has not cleared the dues of the plaintiff. Hence, this suit.

3. After institution of the suit, summon as per the provisions of Order XXXVII CPC was issued to defendant. The defendant has been served through Sh. Kamlesh on 04.08.2022. The requisite time of appearance has already expired because this is a suit under Order XXXVII CPC.

4. I have heard the arguments advanced by Ld. Counsel for the plaintiff and gone through the record. Record shows that it is the suit for recovery of outstanding amount of Rs. 4,46,268/- to be paid by defendant. The plaintiff's case is based on ledger account statement for the period from 01.04.2015 to 31.03.2016, 01.04.2017 to 31.03.2018 and 01.04.2020 to 31.03.2021 CS 492/21 Sunil Sabharwal Vs Hind Agro Industries Ltd. Page 2 of 4 respectively, Confirmation of Accounts from 01.04.2017 to 21.10.2020 of defendant, copy of various invoices for the period between 2015 to 2017, office copy of Legal Notice 21.12.2015 alongwith booking receipt and Tracking Report. The plaintiff has also placed on record Non Starter Report issued by South East District Legal Services Authority.

5. A careful scanning of record shows that the plaintiff's account statement for the period 01.04.2017 to 31.03.2018 shows opening balance of Rs. 4,95,268/- and transaction during the period up to 03.11.2017, finally showing the closing balance of Rs. 4,96,168/-. This account statement is duly confirmed by the defendant while submitting "Confirmation of Account" dated 22.10.2020 confirming the account for the period 01.04.2017 to 21.10.2020. This document contains details regarding principal amount lying with the defendant. The account statement confirms the "closing balance" to be Rs. 4,96,268/-. From this confirmation of account for the period 01.04.2017 to 21.10.2020 of the defendant, not only opening and closing balance match but intervening transaction both on debit as well as credit side also matches. The ledger account statement of plaintiff for period 01.04.2020 to 25.03.2021 reflect that there is an entry in the column of credit of Rs. 50,000/- on 31.01.2021. Even at the transaction level, the plaintiff has buttressed its case by placing on record true copy of invoices which contains description of goods, quantity, rate, customer details etc. It is no more res integra that unsigned invoices can be a valid basis to file a suit under Order CS 492/21 Sunil Sabharwal Vs Hind Agro Industries Ltd. Page 3 of 4 XXXVII of the CPC. As mentioned, despite service, the defendant did not appear to controvert the case of the plaintiff and the prescribed period of 10 days for filing of appearance has already been expired, hence, as per the Order XXXVII (2)(3) of CPC, the allegation as contained in the plaint are deemed to be proved and admitted by the defendant and accordingly, the plaintiff is entitled for the decree in its favour and against the defendant. Hence, the suit of the plaint is decreed in its favour and against the defendant. Hence, this suit is plaintiff is decreed against the defendant for Rs. 4,46,168/- from 31.01.2021 alongwith pendente lite and future interest @ 9% per annum till its realization. The plaintiff is also entitled for cost of litigation and the costs of the suit. The Advocate fee is assessed to be Rs. 15000/- only and same is hereby awarded in favour of plaintiff. Costs of suit i.e. court fee etc., are also awarded in favour of plaintiff. Decree sheet be prepared accordingly. Digitally signed VINEETA by VINEETA GOYAL GOYAL Date: 2022.12.13 15:18:48 +0530 Pronounced in the open Court (Vineeta Goyal) th on 13 December, 2022 District Judge (Commercial)-02 South-East, Saket Court, New Delhi CS 492/21 Sunil Sabharwal Vs Hind Agro Industries Ltd. Page 4 of 4