Bangalore District Court
Smt. Rajani S W/O vs M/S Hng Retail Private on 18 December, 2019
IN THE COURT OF THE VII ADDL. CITY CIVIL AND
SESSIONS JUDGE, (CCH NO.19), BENGALURU
Dated : This the 18th day of December, 2019.
PRESENT
Smt.M.LATHA KUMARI, M.A., LL.M.,
VII Addl. City Civil & Sessions Judge,
Bengaluru.
O.S.No.6880/2017
Plaintiff: Smt. Rajani S W/o.
Sri K. Nagesh, Aged
about 25 years,
proprietor of Prajwal
Packers, No.57/5,
Doddaiah Garden,
Kottigepalya, Magadi
Main Road,
Bangalore-560091.
(By Sri Ravishankar T.P-
Adv.)
/Vs/
Defendant: M/s HNG Retail Private
Limited,Salar Online
No.728,Grace Platina,
3rd Floor,CMH Road,
Indira Nagar,Bangalore-
560038.
Represented by It's
Managing
Director/Director &
2 O.S.NO.6880/2017
Authorized Signatory,
Mr. Jawad Ayaz.
(By Sri Vikhar Ahmed B,
Adv.)
Date of institution 10.10.2017
of suit:
Nature of suit : Money Suit
[
Date of commencement 23.07.2019
of recording evidence :
Date on which 18.12.2019
Judgment was
pronounced :
Total duration Days Months Years
08 02 02
JUDGMENT
This is plaintiff's suit for judgment and decree against the defendant directing the defendant to pay a sum of Rs.15,07,464/- together with interest at the rate of 21% p.a. from the date of suit till realization.
2. The brief facts of the plaintiff's case is that, plaintiff is a proprietor of Prajwal Packers and engaged in 3 O.S.NO.6880/2017 the business of manufacturing and distribution of packaging materials such as EPE Foam Roll, 2 Ply Corrugated Roll, Edge Angle Board, Air Bubble Roll, Stretch Film etc., and defendant is one of the customer of plaintiff since two years.
It is plaintiff's further case that, defendant has regularly purchased afore mentioned packaging materials from the plaintiff as per the purchaser orders and plaintiff has supplied the materials on 30 days credit basis under various invoices. Initially the defendant has made payments through on line RTGS to the plaintiff and thereafter, delayed in making the payments. Plaintiff who were beyond the credit period,and inspite of repeated requests of the plaintiff, defendant failed to regularize the payment due to the defendant. The defendant is over due of payment to the plaintiff towards materials supplied under as many as 25 invoices from 7.9.2016 to 11.3.2017 totally amounting to Rs.15,07,464/-.
4 O.S.NO.6880/2017
It is further mentioned that, plaintiff has demanded the payment from the defendant. On 10.5.2017 the defendant had sent the e-mail attaching the ledger statement of the plaintiff as on 9.5.2017 admitting the payment overdue to an extent of Rs.14,68,264/-. However, defendant failed to repay the same. Hence, plaintiff got issued notice to the defendant calling upon him to clear the dues along with interest at the rate of 21% per annum on 24.7.2017. Despite of service of said notice, defendant neither replied to the said notice nor given any reply nor paid any amount. Hence, plaintiff constrained to file this suit for the reliefs mentioned supra.
3. On issuance of suit summons, defendant appeared through his counsel and resisted the suit of the plaintiff by filing his written statement stating that, plaintiff's suit is required to be rejected for suppression of material facts. Defendant has filed his para-wise remarks denying 5 O.S.NO.6880/2017 the case of the plaintiff and asserted that, there is no cause of action for the plaintiff to file this suit and the cause of action as alleged by the plaintiff is a fictitious one and the defendant has also mentioned that the genuineness of the documents i.e., as many as 25 invoices produced by the plaintiff are questioned and he has also denied the said invoices and pray for dismissal of this suit with exemplary costs.
4. Based on these pleadings, this Court has framed following issues:
1. Whether the Plaintiff proves that Defendant is due of Rs.15,07,464/- to the Plaintiff towards the purchase of the packaging material under 25 invoices raised between 07.09.2016 to 11.03.2017?
2. Whether the Plaintiff is entitle to recover said amount of Rs.15,07,464/- together with interest at the rate of 21% p.a from the date of notice till realization?
3. What order or decree?6 O.S.NO.6880/2017
5. On behalf of plaintiff, the power of attorney holder of plaintiff got examined himself as PW.1 and got marked as many as 29 documents as per Ex.P.1 to Ex.P.29. Defendant though appeared through his counsel and resisted the suit of the plaintiff either cross-examined PW.1 nor stepped into the witness-box.
6. I have carefully scrutinized entire records before me. Heard the arguments.
7. My findings on the above Issues are:
Issue No.1 : In the Affirmative Issue No.2 : In the Affirmative Issue No.3 : As per final order, for the following:
REASONS
8. ISSUES NO.1 & 2: These issues are taken up together for consideration to avoid repetition of facts and circumstances of the case.
7 O.S.NO.6880/2017
9. PW.1, the power of attorney holder of plaintiff, who got examined himself on behalf of plaintiff by reiterating the entire plaint averments got marked as many as 29 documents Ex.P1 to P29. Ex.P1 is the GPA executed by plaintiff in favour of PW.1, who is none other than the husband of plaintiff. Ex.P2 to P26 are the various invoices, under which plaintiff is claiming relief. Ex.P27 is E-mail sent by defendant along with ledger extract and said ledger extract is again marked as Ex.P27 while examining PW.1 on 23.7.2019. Ex.P28 is the demand notice issued by plaintiff. Ex.P29 is the Vat Certificate. Though defendant denied the various invoices Ex.P2 to P26 and also questioned its genuineness, he has neither cross-examined PW.1 nor stepped into the witness-box. As per Ex.P27, which is a E-Mail according to plaintiff sent by defendant, defendant has acknowledged the amount due as claimed by the plaintiff.
8 O.S.NO.6880/2017
10. Hon'ble Supreme Court in a decision reported in AIR 1999 Supreme Court, 1341 Eshwar Bai C.Patel Vs. Hairhar Behera held that, "when a person fails to enter into witness-box to state his case on oath, the adverse inference can be drawn as per Section 114 of the Indian Evidence Act, against such person". Further, our Hon'ble High Court of Karnataka in a decision reported in ILR 1998 Karnataka, 2655 observed that, "Court shall have to pass a decree as prayed for, unless the relief itself is, prima-facie barred by limitation" when the defendant does not contest the matter.
11. Inspite of filing his written statement, defendant neither stepped into the witness-box nor cross-examined PW.1 inspite of giving sufficient opportunity by entertaining the various interim applications filed by defendant. When the matter has been posted for judgment, the learned Counsel for defendant filed an application without even serving copy of advancement to the plaintiff on 17.12.2019 9 O.S.NO.6880/2017 alongwith postal receipt stating that, he has sent his advancement application copy through registered post and sought for advance the matter to consider his accompanying applications. When once the matter has been posted for judgment, the Court has no business to entertain such applications except to pass judgment. However, the oral and documentary evidence relied upon by the plaintiff more particularly, the invoices Ex.P2 to P26 and also E-Mail sent by the defendant along with ledger extract Ex.P27 and the ledger extract which is also marked as Ex.P27 establishes the claim of the plaintiff. Further, in the invoices itself there is a condition that, for delayed payment, an interest at the rate of 21% per annum will be charged. Under such circumstances, interest at the rate of 21% per annum claimed by the plaintiff is also in accordance with the business conditions. Accordingly, I have answered issues No.1 and 2 in the affirmative.
10 O.S.NO.6880/2017
12. ISSUE NO.3: In view of my findings on issues No.1 and 2, I proceed to pass the following:
ORDER Suit of the plaintiff is decreed with cost.
The defendant directed to pay a sum of Rs.15,07,464/- together with interest at the rate of 21% p.a. from the date of suit till realization within 30 days from today.
Draw decree accordingly.
*** (Dictated to the J.W, computerized and print out taken by her, revised, corrected and then pronounced by me in open Court today, the 18th day of December, 2019).
(M.LATHA KUMARI) VII.ADDL.CITY CIVIL & SESSIONS JUDGE, BENGALURU.
ANNEXURE Witnesses examined on behalf of Plaintiff:
PW.1 : Nagesh.K 11 O.S.NO.6880/2017 Witness examined on behalf of Defendants:
-Nil-
Documents marked on behalf of Plaintiff:
Ex.P.1 General Power of Attorney
executed by my wife plaintiff in
my favour
Ex.P.2 Tax invoice dated 03.09.2016
Ex.P.3 Tax invoice dated 14.09.2016
Ex.P.4 Tax invoice dated 16.09.2016
Ex.P.5 Tax invoice dated 20.09.2016
Ex.P.6 Tax invoice dated 04.10.2016
Ex.P.7 Another Tax invoice dated
04.10.2016
Ex.P.8 Tax invoice dated 05.10.2016
Ex.P.9 Tax invoice dated 06.10.2016
Ex.P.10 Tax invoice dated 07.10.2016
Ex.P.11 Another Tax invoice dated
07.10.2016
Ex.P.12 Tax invoice dated 22.10.2016
Ex.P.13 Tax invoice dated 02.11.2016
Ex.P.14 Tax invoice dated 07.11.2016
Ex.P.15 Tax invoice dated 08.11.2016
Ex.P.16 Tax invoice dated 22.11.2016
Ex.P.17 Tax invoice dated 09.12.2016
Ex.P.18 Tax invoice dated 04.01.2017
12 O.S.NO.6880/2017
Ex.P.19 Tax invoice dated 07.01.2017
Ex.P.20 Tax invoice dated 25.01.2017
Ex.P.21 Tax invoice dated 13.02.2017
Ex.P.22 Tax invoice dated 15.02.2017
Ex.P.23 Tax invoice dated 20.02.2017
Ex.P.24 Tax invoice dated 25.02.2017
Ex.P.25 Tax invoice dated 06.03.2017
Ex.P.26 Tax invoice dated 11.03.2017
Ex.P.27 Ledger statement
Ex.P.27 E-mail sent by Defendant along
with ledger extract
Ex.P.27(a) Certificate as required U/s 65-B of Evidence At Ex.P. 28 Office copy of Legal notice dated 24.07.2017 Ex.P.28(a) Postal receipt Ex.P.28(b) Postal acknowledgement Ex.P.29 Original VAT certificate dated 27.11.2015 Documents marked on behalf of Defendants:
- Nil -
VII.ADDL.CITY CIVIL & SESSIONS JUDGE, BENGALURU.13 O.S.NO.6880/2017
JUDGMENT PRONOUNCED IN OPEN COURT (vide separate Judgment) Suit of the plaintiff is decreed with cost.
The defendant directed to pay a sum of Rs.15,07,464/- together with interest at the rate of 21% p.a. from the date of suit till realization within 30 days from today.
Draw decree accordingly.
(M.LATHA KUMARI) VII.ADDL.CITY CIVIL & SESSIONS JUDGE, BENGALURU.
.