Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

Delhi District Court

Glync Tech Pvt Ltd vs Harvinder Singh Kohli on 18 May, 2024

 IN THE COURT OF SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE-CUM-RENT
    CONTROLLER, SOUTH-EAST DISTRICT, SAKET
              COURTS, NEW DELHI

Presided By: MS. SWATI SHARMA, DJS
Civil Suit No:275/2021

M/S GLYNC TECH PVT. LTD.
B-1/A-26
Mohan Cooperative Ind. Estate
Mathura Road, Badarpur,
New Delhi 110044                                          ...Plaintiff

                                       Versus

Sh. HARMINDER SINGH KOHLI
PROP.
M/S Lumos Lighting Solution
4A-74, Freedom Fighter Enclave
Neb Saria, New Delhi 110068                               ...Defendant


 SUIT FOR RECOVERY OF RS.1,90,000/- (ONE LAC AND
  NINETY THOUSAND ONLY) UNDER ORDER XXXVII
                    CPC

                                         Date of Institution: 22.02.2021
                                     Date of reserving order:18.05.2024
                                           Date of Judgment: 18.05.2024

                         SUMMARY JUDGMENT
Plaintiff's case:
1.

The present summary suit under Order 37 of CPC has been filed by the plaintiff for seeking recovery Rs.1,90,000/- along with pendente lite and future interest @ 18% per annum and costs.

2. Briefly stated the facts are that the plaintiff is body corporate under the Companies Act and is engaged in the business of manufacturing, trading in LED lights and allied products. Sh. Prajesh Kumar Jha, who is Manager of the plaintiff, has been duly authorized vide Board of Resolution dated 19.08.2020 to file the present suit. The defendant is engaged in the business of trading in the electrical/electronic products; amongst others in the products of the plaintiff. Shri Harminder Singh Kohli is the proprietor and responsible for its all actions and deeds. In the course of their business, the defendant had been buying the products of the plaintiff assuring payment against delivery. It is further averred that the plaintiff had been supplying products on the demand and representation of the defendant and is maintaining a running account. The defendant had been issuing cheques in payment of the supplies, mostly bill wise.

3. It is further averred that initially, the cheques issued by the defendant were encashed on presentation. However, later from October, 2018, though the defendant had issued cheques for each transaction but had later requested the plaintiff for withholding his cheques and to provide him accommodation for the time being, due to delay in recovery of his dues from his clients. Further, the defendant had assured that he would pay for the cheques within their period of validity. Later, at the instance and direction of the defendant, the cheque No. 000122 for Rs. 2712/- and 000123 for Rs 21700/- were deposited, just before the CS SCJ No.275/2021 M/s Glync Tech Pvt. Ltd. vs. Harminder Singh Kohli Page No.2/5 expiry of their validity but the same were returned unpaid due to insufficient funds. The defendant, however, apologized and prayed for not to file the complaint u/s 138 of N.1 Act, promising to pay for them alongwith other cheques issued for subsequent sales before end of the financial year. The defendant had issued eleven cheques against the invoices of the plaintiff which are as under:-

S.No.          Invoice       Date           Amount   Cheque   Date
               No.                                   no.
1              447/448       27/10/18 12064          0001144 8/12/18
2              456/457       30/10/18 8400           000119   9/12/18
3              414           17/10/18 19405          000109   22/12/18
4              488           16/11/18 21700          000123   27/12/18
5              486           15/11/18 2712           000122   22/12/18
6              665           11/02/19 14921          000139   15/02/19
7              671           12/01/19 26405          000138   21/02/19
8              679           15/01/19 12096          000140   25/02/19
9              687           17/01/19 4650           000141   02/03/19
10             702           23/01/19 5010           000143   15/03/19
11             712           25/01/19 3450           000144   18/03/19

4. It is further averred that the said cheques were for sum of Rs.1,30,813/- whereas, as per ledger account maintained by the plaintiff, the total amount due is Rs. 1,44,050/-. Further that, the plaintiff was always prevented to present the said cheques on due date as defendant had been assuring said payment in one go. However, when the plaintiff insisted on CS SCJ No.275/2021 M/s Glync Tech Pvt. Ltd. vs. Harminder Singh Kohli Page No.3/5 payment of their dues before accepting further orders, the defendant has stopped further buying of the goods. Further that, a legal notice of demand was sent to the defendant on 22.01.2020 but, despite service of legal notice, the defendant failed to make the payment of outstanding dues. Hence, the present suit has been filed.

5. Summons as prescribed under Order 37 Rule 2 CPC, Form 4, Appendix B Schedule-1 CPC were ordered to be served upon the defendant and the defendant was duly served on 07.03.2022. The defendant entered his appearance on 16.03.2022 and summons for judgment were issued upon the defendant. The defendant was served with the summons of judgment and the present application seeking leave to defend was filed on 01.07.2023 alongwith an application under Section 5 of Limitation Act for condoning the delay of 18 days in filing of said leave to defend application. Vide separate order of even date, the said application seeking leave to defend has been dismissed.

6. The suit of the plaintiff is based upon the cheques issued by the defendant. Thus, the suit of the plaintiff is for recovery of outstanding amount of Rs.1,90,000/- which falls within the purview of Order 37 CPC.

7. The present suit has been filed on 22.02.2021. The last cheque is dated 18.03.2019. Therefore, the present suit has been filed within the prescribed period of limitation.

8. The suit has been filed within the jurisdiction of this Court as has been clarified in the order of application seeking leave to defend. Hence, this court has territorial jurisdiction to try the present suit.

9. The plaintiff is, thus, entitled to recover the amount due and payable of Rs. 1,30,813/-(amount of dishonored cheques).

10. Thus, as a net result of the aforesaid, this suit is decreed in favour of the plaintiff and against the defendant. It is held that the plaintiff is entitled to recover from the defendant, an amount of Rs. 1,30,813/-. However, pendente-lite and future interest at 18% p.a appears to be unjustified and exorbitant. Hence, pendente-lite and future interest at 6% p.a appears to be just and equitable. No order as to costs.

11. After preparation of the decree sheet by the Reader, the file shall be consigned to the record room. Typed directly on court computer and announced in the Open Court on 18.05.2024 (Swati Sharma) Senior Civil Judge-cum-Rent Controller South-East, Saket Courts, New Delhi CS SCJ No.275/2021 M/s Glync Tech Pvt. Ltd. vs. Harminder Singh Kohli Page No.5/5