Delhi District Court
Vivek Kadyan vs Pyramid E And C Fze on 2 February, 2024
IN THE COURT OF MS. NEHA MITTAL, ASCJ-JSCC-GJ
NORTH WEST DISTRICT, ROHINI COURTS, DELHI
Suit No. 494/2022
VIVEK KADYAN
S/o Sh. Om Parkash Kadyan
Chamber no.1401, Lawyer's Chamber Block,
Rohini Court Complex, Delhi-110085
......Plaintiff
Versus
1.Pyramid E & C FZE Through it's CMD Sh. Ashish Bajpai
2. Sh. Ashish Bajpai, Chairman & Managing Director Pyramid E & C FZE Email: [email protected]
3. Ms. Sangita Polekar Sr. Officer Finance & Administration.
Pyramid E & C FZE Email: [email protected] Correspondence office at:
4th Floor, Hamilton 'A' Wing, Hiranandani Business Park, Thane, Mumbai-400607 .....Defendants Date of Institution : 08.04.2022 Date of reserving of Order : 22.01.2024 Date of pronouncing Order : 02.02.2024 CS No. 494/22 Vivek Kadyan vs Pyramid E & C FZE& Anr. 1/10 SUIT FOR RECOVERY OF AMOUNT OF RS.1,32,000/- along with interest thereon @18 % per annum
1. The brief facts of the case of Plaintiff are that the Plaintiff is an advocate by profession and practices in various Courts of Delhi having Chamber No.1401, Lawyer's Chamber Block, Rohini Court Complex, Delhi- 110085. That the Defendant No.1 is a business entity/Company wherein the Defendant No. 2 & Defendant No. 3 are its Chairman & Managing Director and Senior Officer-Finance & Administration respectively. That in the month of April/May 2018, the Plaintiff was introduced to the Defendant No.2 by his friend namely Sh. Amit Golcha who was also client of the Plaintiff. The Defendant No.2 discussed with the Plaintiff a Civil Suit for Decree of Declaration, Permanent Injunction and Mandatory Injunction filed by M/S WOG Technologies (P) Ltd. against his company i.e. Pyramid E & C FZE pending in the Court of Ms. Divya Malhotra, Ld. Civil Judge, Rohini Courts, Delhi. That after the discussion about the merits of the case and the professional fees to be charged by the Plaintiff, the Defendant No.2 engaged the Plaintiff and hired the professional services of the Plaintiff on a professional fees @ Rs.22,000/- per appearance. That the Defendant No.2 sent the Plaintiff a Vakalatnama of one Sh. Anand Prakash along with extract of resolution passed in meeting of Board of Directors appointing him as the AR in the above noted case. The Plaintiff put his first appearance in the court in the matter on 14.05.2018 and filed the Vakalatnama along with extract of resolution passed in meeting of Board of Directors.
CS No. 494/22 Vivek Kadyan vs Pyramid E & C FZE& Anr. 2/10
2. That the plaintiff regularly appeared in the court on behlf of defendant no.1 and that finally on 23.02.2022, after some clarifications, the matter was fixed for orders at 04:00 pm. As per the order dt. 23.02.2022, the Hon'ble Court allowed the application under section 5 and 8 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 filed by the Plaintiff on behalf of Defendants and matter was disposed of accordingly. That the Plaintiff immediately informed the Defendants the decision of the case and upon instructions, the Plaintiff sent to the Defendant No. 3 an Invoice Ref. No. VK/06/2022 dated 24.02.2022 for Rs.1,32,000/- for the remaining Professional Fees for 6 Court Appearance on the date of hearing for 28.01.2019, 09.04.2019, 06.08.2019, 18.11.2021, 18.01.2022 & 23.02.2022 as agreed @ Rs.22,000/- per appearance through Speed-Post as well as email to the Defendant No.2 and through Whatsapp on Mobile No. 9819862945 of the Defendant No.3. The Plaintiff also attached the daily order sheet of his presence in the court on above mentioned dates of hearings. The Plaintiff also informed the Defendants that the Invoices No. VK/04/2018 and VK/05/2018 for dates of hearing on 14.05.2018 and 25.07.2018 respectively has already been raised and payment has already been received @ Rs.22,000/- after deduction of the TDS. That however the Plaintiff was surprised to receive an email dated 11.03.2022 from the Defendant No.3 asking to forward any communication /emails regarding theses court appearances with Pyramid team which was duly responded vide email dated 13.03.2022 stating therein that the Plaintiff have already annexed the order sheet reflecting his presence on the given dates of hearing and CS No. 494/22 Vivek Kadyan vs Pyramid E & C FZE& Anr. 3/10 highlighted the same.
3. That That the Plaintiff tried calling the Defendant No.3 once on 13.03.2022 and twice on 14.03.2022 however the calls were not picked by the Defendant No.3. In order to apprise of this development, the Plaintiff called the Defendant No.2 on his Whatsapp No. +1 (470) 232-7875 however the Defendant No.2 also didn't take the call to clarify. That the plaintiff got a call from the Defendant No.3 holding the invoice VK/06/2022 dated 24.02.2022 a waste stating that 3 of the hearings has been done through Video Conferencing hence deserves not to be counted.
The Plaintiff clarified to Defendants that due to Covid-19 restrictions and directions of Hon'ble Delhi High Court, the courts are working through Video Conferencing. The Plaintiff also apprised the Defendant No. 3 that there had been around 32 hearings in the matter however the Plaintiff has raised his invoice only for the effective dates of hearings where the Plaintiff has remained present, either physically or through VC mode. That even after passage of a week's time, the Plaintiff didn't receive any call/message/email or response to his repeated requests to the defendants to clear his Invoice Ref. No. VK/06/2022 dated 24.02.2022 for Rs. 1.32,000/-. That the plaintiff sent a Legal Notice dt. 21.03.2022 upon the defendants to make the payment of Rs.1,32,000/- (Rupees One Lakh Thirty Two Thousand only) towards pending professional fees in the matter titled M/S WOG Tech. Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Pyramid E & C FZE & Anr. vide CS No.61799/2016; Invoice Ref. No. VK/06/2022 dated 24.02.2022 along with an interest @ 18% p.a. w.e.f. 01.03.2022 till the realization of the amount along with Rs. 11,000/- towards the CS No. 494/22 Vivek Kadyan vs Pyramid E & C FZE& Anr. 4/10 charges for the Legal Notice within a period of 07 days from the date of receipt of the legal notice. That the Defendants didn't even bother to reply the aforesaid Legal Notice dated 21.03.2022 and also failed to make the payment.
4. Vide order dated 08.04.2019, summons were directed to be issued upon the defendant. Summons issued to defendants were duly served by way of email. During proceedings, defendants were proceeded ex-parte vide order dated 13.09.2022. Thereafter, application u/O 9 rule 7 CPC was filed on behalf of defendants, which was allowed vide order dated 30.09.2022 and WS filed by the defendants.
5. In their WS, defendants have stated that the defendant no.1 is a foreign entity having its office outside the jurisdiction of India i.e. in Dubai, United Arab Emirates. The defendant no.2 is a Non-Resident Indian residing at Houston, United States of America for the past 6 years and defendant no.3 is an accountant in an affiliated firm of defendant no.1 in Thane, Maharashtra. Te averments made in the plaint have been denied by the defendants and it is stated that the plaintiff was engaged by the defendants as their counsel against total professional fees of Rs. 22,000/-. It is further stated that only two effective hearings have taken place during the course of the proceedings in M/s WOG Technologies (P) Ltd. vs. Pyramid E &C FZE. It is further stated that plaintiff was paid Rs. 22,000/- by the defendant no.1 as soon as the demand was raised i.e. on 10.05.2018 vide invoice No. VK/04/2018, being under the impression that the entire matter is taken care of and there is no due lying at the hands of the CS No. 494/22 Vivek Kadyan vs Pyramid E & C FZE& Anr. 5/10 defendant no.1. Plaintiff again made a demand of Rs.22,000/- from the defendant no.1 on the pretext that there are certain further procedures to be undertaken by him, which the defendant no.1 promptly fulfilled, having full faith in his legal counsel, despite agreeing to the total fee of Rs.22,000/- only, rather than Rs.44,000/- which was finally paid on 01.07.2018 VK/05/2018. With these submissions, it is prayed that the present suit be dismissed.
6. Replication to the WS of defendant was filed on behalf of the plaintiff and he denied the contents of WS.
7. After completion of pleadings, followings issues were framed vide order dated 05.12.2022:
i) Whether there is any cause of action in favour of plaintiff to file the instant suit? OPD.
ii) Whether the plaintiff is entitled for recovery of amount, as prayed? OPP
iii) Relief, if any.
8. The Plaintiff examined himself as PW-1. He tendered his affidavit Ex.PW-1/A and relied upon the following documents :-
1. The extracts from the website of defendant No. 1 is Ex. PW1/A.
2. Certified copy of vakalatnama dated 08.05.2018 is Ex. PW1/B.
3. Certified copies of ordersheets dated 14.05.2018, 25.07.2018, 28.01.2019, 09.04.2019, 06.08.2019, CS No. 494/22 Vivek Kadyan vs Pyramid E & C FZE& Anr. 6/10 18.11.2021, 18.01.2022 and 23.02.2022 are Ex.PW1/C (colly).
4. Office copy of invoice reference No. VK/06/2022 dated 24.02.2022 is Ex. PW1/D.
5. Office copies of invoice reference No. VK/04/2018 dated 29.08.2018 and invoice reference No. VK/05/2018 are Ex. PW1/E (colly).
6. Screen shot of Whatsapp messages dated 03.03.2022 and 11.03.2022 are Ex. PW1/F.
7. Copy of Email dated 11.03.2022 and its reply dated 13.03.2022 are Ex. PW1/G.
8. Office copy of legal notice dated 21.03.2022 is Ex. PW1/H.
9. Certificate U/s 65B of Indian Evidence Act is Ex. PW1/I. PW-1 was duly cross-examined by counsel for the defendants.
9. Various opportunities were given to the defendant to lead DE. Defendant neither appeared nor led any DE. Hence, opportunity to lead DE was closed vide order dated 14.12.2023.
10. This Court has heard the arguments advanced by Ld. Counsel for the plaintiff and also has gone through the evidence on record and the written submissions filed by the defendants. FINDINGS CS No. 494/22 Vivek Kadyan vs Pyramid E & C FZE& Anr. 7/10 Issue no.1 Whether there is any cause of action in favour of plaintiff to file the instant suit? OPD.
11. The burden to prove this issue is upon the defendants.
12. However, neither any evidence has been led by the defendants in this regard nor any arguments have been advanced.
13. In view thereof, issue is decided in favour of plaintiff and against the defendants.
Issue no.1 Whether the plaintiff is entitled for recovery of amount, as prayed? OPP
14. The burden to prove this issue is upon the plaintiff.
15. It has been argued on behalf of plaintiff that his professional services were engaged by the defendants @ Rs.22000/- per hearing but the defendants have failed to clear his dues. On the other hand, it has been submitted on behalf of the defendant that the services of the plaintiff were engaged for a total sum of Rs.22,000/-.
16. Perusal of record shows that no written agreement was admittedly entered into between the parties regarding the engaging of professional services of the plaintiff. However, it is not in dispute that the defendants have paid a sum of Rs.22,000/- each on two occasions to the plaintiff on raising of invoices Ex. PW-1/E (colly). A perusal of the said invoices shows that it has been mentioned therein as "fees for appearance per date of hearing @ Rs.22,000/-". The defendants have made payment of Rs. 44,000/ to the plaintiff against the said bills without raising any objection to the effect that Rs. 22000/- is the one time fees CS No. 494/22 Vivek Kadyan vs Pyramid E & C FZE& Anr. 8/10 decided between the parties and not per hearing fees. The fact that the defendants have honoured the said invoices without raising any objections lends credibility to the case of the plaintiff. It is further pertinent to note that the defendants have not led any evidence despite opportunity. The mere averments of the defendants, in the absence of any evidence, are insufficient to dislodge the case of the plaintiff.
17. The plaintiff has duly proved the invoice Ex. PW-1/D (colly). The attendance of the plaintiff is mentioned as counsel for defendants in the ordersheets annexed with invoice Ex. PW- 1/D (colly). The plaintiff has filed the suit with the period of limitation. The office of plaintiff is situated within the territorial jurisdiction of this court. The cause of action for filing the present suit arose within the territorial jurisdiction of this court. The plaintiff is, thus, entitled to recovery of sum of Rs.1,32,000/- towards invoice Ex. PW-1/D (colly).
18. The plaintiff has also prayed for pendente lite and future interest at the rate of 18% per annum. However, having regard to the prevailing bank rates, ends of justice would be met if the plaintiff is awarded pendente lite interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of institution of the suit till the date of decree and future interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of decree till realization.
19. Hence, the suit is decreed in favour of the plaintiff and against the defendants for a sum of Rs.1,32,000/- alongwith pendente lite interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date CS No. 494/22 Vivek Kadyan vs Pyramid E & C FZE& Anr. 9/10 of institution till the date of decree as well as future interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of decree till realization on the sum adjudged. No order as to cost. Decree sheet be prepared accordingly, subject to filing of the deficient Court Fee, if any.
20. File be consigned to Record Room after due compliance.Digitally signed by NEHA NEHA MITTAL MITTAL Date:
2024.02.02 16:37:06 +0530 (Announced in the open Court) (NEHA MITTAL) 02.02.2024 JSCC/ASCJ/GJ(NORTH-WEST) ROHINI COURTS/ DELHI CS No. 494/22 Vivek Kadyan vs Pyramid E & C FZE& Anr. 10/10