Bangalore District Court
M/S Vijayalakshmi Saree Mandir vs M/S Vaibhav Textiles And Readymade on 28 February, 2024
IN THE COURT OF LXXXIX ADDL.CITY CIVIL & SESSIONS
JUDGE, BENGALURU. (CCH-90)
Present: Sri.S.J.Krishna, B.Sc., LL.B.,
LXXXIX Addl.City Civil &
Sessions Judge, Bengaluru.
Dated: 28th FEBRUARY 2024
Com.O.S.No:1331 of 2022
PLAINTIFF M/s.Vijayalakshmi Saree Mandir,
Represented by
Managing Partner,
Sri.Narendra Narayana,
No.36, Shop No.202,
2nd Floor, ADC Complex,
Jumma Masjid Road,
Bengaluru-560 002.
(By Sri.Lingaraju, Advocate)
/VS/
DEFENDANTS 01. M/s.Vaibhav Textiles & Readymade,
(Kanchi Mahalakshmi),
Represented by its Partners
Sri.T.Veera Venkataramana,
And Smt.Suryavathi,
02. Sri.T.Veera Venkataramana,
Partner of M/s.Vaibhav Textiles &
Readymade,
Age:Major
03. Smt.Suryavathi,
W/o Sri.T.Veera Venkataramana,
/2/
Com.O.S.No.1331/2022
Age:Major,
Their Shop Address,
No.18, T.K.Street,
Tirupathi, Andhra Pradesh-517 501.
(By Sri.K.Mohanachari, Advocate)
Date of Institution of : 14.09.2022
suit
Nature of suit : Money Suit
(suit on pronote, suit for
declaration and
possession suit for
injunction, etc.,)
Date of commencement : 10.07.2023
of recording of evidence
Date of judgment : 28.02.2024
Total duration : Year/s Month/s Day/s
01 05 14
(S.J.KRISHNA)
LXXXIX ADDL.CITY CIVIL &
SESSIONS JUDGE, BENGALURU.
(CCH-90)
JUDGMENT
The plaintiff has filed this suit against the defendant for a judgment and decree directing the defendants to pay a sum of ₹.5,41,760/- with the interest at the rate of 21% p.a. compounded monthly rests from the date of suit till the date of realization to the plaintiff; Grant such other relief including costs of this suit in the interest of justice.
/3/ Com.O.S.No.1331/2022 The summary of the case of the plaintiff is as follows:
02. The plaintiff is a partnership firm engaged in wholesale business in Art Silk Sarees, Fancy Sarees and allied products and selling the same to the prospective wholesale buyers in and around South India. The defendant No.1 is a partnership firm consisting of its partners defendant No:2 and 3 (Collectively called as defendant). The defendant has been the customer of the plaintiff for the past several years. The defendant used to purchase sarees and allied products on credit from the plaintiff firm.
03. The plaintiff has supplied the sarees and allied materials as per the request of the defendant on credit basis as detailed below:
SI.No Invoice Nos. Dated Amount in Rs.
1. 5230 09.02.2019 ₹.2,23,913-00
2. 5235 13.02.2019 ₹.2,61,503-00
3. 5240 14.02.2019 ₹.81,344-00 Grand Total ₹.5,66,760-00
04. The plaintiff has transported the said goods under the above said credit invoices, through VRL Logistics and the /4/ Com.O.S.No.1331/2022 goods were delivered to the defendant at their place of business at Tirupathi. And defendants have received and acknowledged the goods under the above said credit invoices.
05. As per the terms and conditions of tax invoices, the defendant is liable to pay the invoice amounts within a month from the date of each tax invoices. Failure to pay the invoice amount within the stipulated time it would attract interest at 21% p.a. on over dues for the delayed period from the date of each tax invoice to till the date of payment.
06. After delivery of the said goods, the defendant failed to make payment of tax invoices and instead made the part payment after repeated follow-ups as detailed below.
SI.No Receipt Nos. Dated Amount in Rs.
1. 214 02.11.2020 ₹.10,000/-
2. 220 03.11.2020 ₹.10,000/-
3. 225 04.11.2020 ₹.5,000/-
Total ₹.25,000/-
07. The plaintiff has acknowledged the receipt of part payments made by the defendant and there is still an outstanding due of ₹. 5,41,760/- (Rupees Five Lakhs Forty-One Thousand Seven Hundred and Sixty) which the defendant has /5/ Com.O.S.No.1331/2022 utterly failed and intentionally neglected to pay the said dues to harass the plaintiff firm.
08. The Defendant has failed to repay the outstanding amount as agreed and therefore, the plaintiff has called upon the Defendant to repay the amount, by repeated request. However, the Defendant has failed to repay the outstanding due amount so for, the Plaintiff also issued legal notice through his counsel dated 16.04.2022 to the Defendant to pay the outstanding amount. Therefore, the plaintiff is constrained to file this suit to recover the outstanding dues.
09. The Defendants are jointly severally and personally liable to pay the outstanding amount with future interest to the plaintiff.
10. The plaintiff in its ordinary course of business has maintained transparent Books of account. The plaintiff has furnished extract of ledger from 01.04.2018 to 31.03.2019. As per the Books of Account the maintained by the plaintiff, the total outstanding amount due by the Defendant as on 31.03.2021 is 5,41,760/- (Rupees Five Lakhs Forty-One Thousand Seven Hundred Sixty Rupees) with the interest at the rate of 21% excluding ₹. 5,41,760/-.
/6/ Com.O.S.No.1331/2022
11. As per the Commercial Courts Act, 2015, Rule 3(4) and (6) approached District Legal Services Authority for pre mediation in PIM No.1167/2022. The defendant failed to participate in the PIM proceeding. The DLSA has issued Non Starter Report dated:25.06.2022 in PIM No. 1167/2022.
12. The cause of action arose to this suit on 09.02.2019, the date on which the first invoice were executed by plaintiff at Bengaluru within the territorial jurisdiction of this Hon'ble court. Further the Defendant has been acknowledged their liability through invoices and payment receipts dated 04.11.2020 and DLSA letter dated. 29.06.2022. Hence, the suit is filed within a limitation period.
13. After the service of summons the defendants appeared through their advocate.
The defendant No:2 has filed the written statement as under:
14. The suit is not maintainable either in law or on facts and the same is liable to be dismissed.
15. This defendant has denied the entire plaint averments and put the plaintiff to strict proof of the same save /7/ Com.O.S.No.1331/2022 those expressly and specifically admitted by it. The defendant has denied the status of the plaintiff that it is a partnership firm. The defendant has admitted that the suit is filed for realization of the amount alleged to be an outstanding under the credit facility availed by the defendants. The details of the alleged credit facility are not mentioned specifically in the plaint.
16. The defendant has denied the liability alleged by the plaintiff and also the liability to pay interest at 21% on over dues. The defendant has denied the claim of the plaintiff that the defendant has made part payment amounting to ₹.25,000/-. The defendant has denied the delivery of goods to the defendant to its office at Tirupathi by the plaintiff through VRL logistics.
17. The defendant has denied the cause of action to file the suit averred by the plaintiff. The defendant has put the plaintiff to strict proof of the documents relied on by the plaintiff including the Non-starter Report issued by the DLSA.
18. The defendant has stated that the alleged invoice statement Dt.9-2 2019, 13-2-2019 and 14-2-2019 so also the e-way bills Dt. 12-2-2019, 19-2- 2019 and 20-2-2019 are not having any authentication from the defendant. No signatures /8/ Com.O.S.No.1331/2022 of the defendants were obtained to substantiate the transaction between the plaintiff and defendants. In the absence of signatures of defendants about its authentication and acceptance, the question of receipt of said products cannot be believed. The alleged track consignment details and booking receipts are hit by Section 65-B of Indian Evidence Act. Without filing the source of records, filing of the documents along with Certificate alleged to be under Section 65-B of Indian Evidence Act is unknown to law and the said certificate is self serving document cannot be considered as authentication under the said provision. The suit is filed basing on the self serving documents and Section 65-B of Indian Evidence Act has not followed and hence the suit ought not to have been numbered and is liable to be dismissed.
19. Without proving the transaction between the plaintiff and defendants, the plaintiff is contending that there is an outstanding amount as per the statement of ledger account that too without any certification relating to true transaction. The same cannot be thought off and hence it is for the plaintiff to prove that there is transaction between the plaintiff and defendants.
20. The alleged last transaction between the plaintiff and defendants is Dt.17-12-2018 and subsequently 3 other /9/ Com.O.S.No.1331/2022 transactions are shown on Dt.9-2-2019, 13-2-2019 and 14-2- 2019 and for the alleged nonpayment of amounts on the said dates. It is not the case of the plaintiff that in original documents they had obtained the signatures of the defendants. As mentioned above to overcome the law of limitation, the said 3 receipts vide receipt No.2065, 2066 and 2067 were created on Dt.2-11-2020, 3-11-2020 and 4- 11- 2020 and the receipt Numbers are continuous. When there are 3 transactions in 3 days how it can be continuous receipts for the alleged payment. In view of the above the suit which is filed on 14-9-2022 is barred by Principles of Law of Limitation. The Plaintiff ought to have filed the suit on 14-2-2022 itself and hence the suit is barred by the Principles of Law of Limitation. The alleged payments shown in the plaint at para 8 has to be proved strictly and to avoid Law of Limitation, the said part payments were created and in view of the same, the suit is barred by law of limitation and the suit is liable to be dismissed.
21. The suit as framed by the plaintiff is not an accordance with section 34 of Indian Evidence Act and the primary documentary proof was not at all filed and basing on the created records the suit is filed which is not maintainable and on this ground also the suit is liable to be dismissed.
/10/ Com.O.S.No.1331/2022
22. The defendant has prayed the Court to dismiss the suit with costs.
23. Based on the rival pleadings the following ISSUES are framed:
ISSUES
1. Whether the Plaintiff proves that the defendants are jointly and severally liable to pay ₹.5,41,760/- outstanding balance towards the purchase of goods from the plaintiff?
2. Whether the Plaintiff proves that the defendants are jointly and severally liable to pay interest at 21% p.a. on ₹.5,41,760/- from the date of suit till the date of realization of entire amount?
3. Whether the defendants prove that the suit filed by the Plaintiff is barred by Limitation?\
4. What Order/decree?
24. The plaintiff has examined its Managing Partner Sri.Narendra Narayana as PW1. The PW1 has exhibited Ex.P1 to Ex.P33 in support of his case. The Defendants have examined defendant No.2 Sri.T.Veera Venkataramana as DW1. The Defendants have not exhibited any documents.
/11/ Com.O.S.No.1331/2022
25. After the conclusion of the trial I have heard the arguments addressed by the learned Advocate for the Plaintiff and the defendants. The learned counsel for the plaintiff has filed the written arguments. I have gone through the materials available on record.
26. My findings on the above ISSUES is as under:
ISSUE No.1 : IN THE AFFIRMATIVE;
ISSUE No.2 : IN THE AFFIRMATIVE;
ISSUE No.3 : IN THE NEGATIVE;
ISSUE No.4 : As per final Order
for the following
REASONS
27. ISSUE No. 1 to 3: All these ISSUES are
interconnected to each other as such they are taken together for discussion to avoid repetition of facts.
28. The plaintiff has filed this suit against the defendant for a judgment and decree directing the defendants to pay a sum of ₹.5,41,760/- with the interest at the rate of 21% p.a. compounded monthly rests from the date of suit till the date of realization to the plaintiff; Grant such other relief including costs of this suit in the interest of justice.
/12/ Com.O.S.No.1331/2022
29. The plaintiff has examined its Managing Partner Sri.Narendra Narayana as PW1. The PW1 has exhibited Ex.P1 to Ex.P33 in support of his case. The Defendants have examined defendant No.2 Sri.T.Veera Venkataramana as DW1. The Defendants have not exhibited any documents. The PW.1 has reiterated the plaint averments in his affidavit evidence. The DW.1 has reiterated the written statement averments in his affidavit evidence.
30. The Plaintiff has filed this suit seeking recovery of unpaid invoice amount along with interest at 21% p.a. from the expiry of stipulated date specified in the invoices. The plaintiff has delivered the goods to the destination of the defendant through VRL logistics. The defendant has made part payment of ₹.25,000/- The defendant has not paid the outstanding dues in spite of repeated requests, demands and issuance of legal notice. The suit is filed within the period of limitation.
31. The defendant has denied the entire case of the plaintiff and is contending that the suit is barred by law of limitation. The defendant is contending that the plaintiff has not delivered any goods as claimed in the plaint. The documents furnished by the plaintiff are all concocted. To save the limitation the plaintiff has concocted the receipts. The /13/ Com.O.S.No.1331/2022 plaintiff has not complied with Section 65B of the Indian Evidence Act, hence the suit is liable to be dismissed.
32. The PW1 has exhibited Ex.P1 Notarized copy of the Partnership dated:15.12.2012 to evidence that the plaintiff is a partnership firm. As per Clause 15(d) of the Partnership Deed dated:15.12.2012, the PW1 Sri.Narendra Narayan is empowered to sue and be sued on behalf of he partnership firm. Hence, Sri.Narendra Narayan is duly authorized person to file the present suit and depose on behalf of the plaintiff partnership firm.
33. The PW1 has exhibited Ex.P2 to Ex.Ex.P6 Invoices and Ex.P33, which show that the Plaintiff has obtained registration under GST Act and has GSTIN:29AAKF V2238F1ZZ. Thus the objections of the defendant that the plaintiff is doing business without raising the bills are rejected.
34. The PW1 has deposed that he would receive purchase orders over telephone, personally also. In case of known customers he would receive purchase orders orally. In case of new purchasers he insists for some reference. In case of regular customers he used to entertain their orders on Credit basis owing to their past conduct.
/14/ Com.O.S.No.1331/2022
35. The defendant No.1 has been doing business with the plaintiff since 2015. He has records to show that the defendant No.1 has been doing business with plaintiff since 2015. He has not furnished the said documents before the Courts.
36. The DW1 in his cross examination has deposed that he knows the plaintiff since 4 to 5 years. In view of the deposition of PW1 and DW1 it is clear that the PW1 and DW1 are not strangers they knew each other and had been doing business. This inference is further strengthened by the conduct of the defendant who alleges that the plaintiff has concocted the delivery challans has not initiated any action against PW1.
37. The Plaintiff is contending that he has supplied the goods to the defendant as per Ex.P3 to Ex.P15; Ex.P29 to Ex.P31. The PW1 further deposed that he does not possess consignee copy. He has secured consignee copies as per Ex.P.29, Ex.P.30 and Ex.P.31 from M/s., VRL., who are the custodians of the documents. Ex.P.29, Ex.P.30 and Ex.P.31 are downloaded by him. He denied that he has concocted Ex.P.29, Ex.P.30 and Ex.P.31 for the purpose of this case. Usually the Logistics concerns will maintain their records for a period of 5 years. On behalf of defendant seal and signature have been affixed on the original of Ex.P.29, Ex.P.30 and Ex.P.31.
/15/ Com.O.S.No.1331/2022
38. The PW1 has answered that it is not the usual practice in the market to obtain the delivery challans/LR receipts within three months from the date of delivery of goods.
39. He has submitted 65B certificate as per Ex.P.33 to corroborate the authenticity of Ex.P.29, Ex.P.30 and Ex.P.31. He denied that has secured Ex.P.29, Ex.P.30 and Ex.P.31 in collusion with VRL after the lapse of more than 4 years 11 months from the date of delivery of the goods.
40. The PW1 has deposed that the invoices as per Ex.P.2 to Ex.P.7 are generated in their office. He has not received any purchase orders in writing from the defendants. He has not obtained any signatures from the defendants after generating the invoices. He denied that Ex.P.2 to Ex.P.7 are generated to show the counter sales of the plaintiff and are not related to the defendants. He denied that the plaintiff has not furnished any receipt for having delivered the materials to the defendants. He denied that the word Self shown at remarks columns of Ex.P.9, Ex.P.11 and Ex.P.14 suggest the plaintiff and not the defendant as the recipient of the materials.
/16/ Com.O.S.No.1331/2022
41. The PW1 denied that he has Exhibited Ex.P.8 and Ex.P.10 for name sake though the plaintiff has not delivered any materials to the defendants.
42. The DW1 deposed that He has GST registration. He has not furnished copies of GST returns in this case. There is no difficulty for him to furnish copies of GST returns. He has not received any materials from plaintiff as per Ex.P.3, Ex.P.5 and Ex.P.7. He denied that a sum of ₹.10,662/-, ₹.12,452/- and ₹.3,873/- was credited to his GST account as per Ex.P.3, Ex.P.5 and Ex.P.7 respectively. He has not received any goods, he has not rejected any goods.
43. From the materials available on record it is evident that the plaintiff has raised invoices as per Ex.P2, Ex.P4 and Ex.P6 in pursuance to the orders placed by the defendant and transported the goods as per e-way bills Ex.P3, Ex.P5 and Ex.P7. In order to evidence the delivery of goods the Plaintiff ahs exhibited Lorry receipts issued by VRL Logistics as per Ex.P8, Ex.P10 and Ex.P13 and Track consignment as per Ex.P9, Ex.P11, Ex.P12, Ex.14 and Ex.P15. As the defendant has disputed the delivery of goods the Plaintiff has exhibited Ex.P27(a)(b) copies of e-mail dated:18.08.2023 and 28.08.2023, wherein the plaintiff has requested VRL Logistics to issue consignee copies of delivery challan/LR receipts.
/17/ Com.O.S.No.1331/2022 M/S.VRL has issued a receipt dated:28.08.2023 as per Ex.P28 charging ₹.5,000/- towards issuance of Consignee copies of LRs. The Plaintiff has exhibited Consignee Copies as per Ex.P29, Ex.P30, Ex.P31 and GST Information as per Ex.P32. In support of Ex.P29 to Ex.P31 the plaintiff has filed 65B certificate as per Ex.P33.
44. The DW1 deposed that The DW1 has denied the seal and signatures found on the documents i.e.,3 receipts issued by VRL Logistics Ltd., to the plaintiff. Those 3 receipts correspond to Ex.P.8, Ex.P.10 and Ex.P.13. He denied that intentionally he has suppressed the documents and has not furnished the same before the Court.
45. The defendant is contending that the 65B Certificates are not valid but has failed to assign any acceptable reasons. Thus it is evident that the plaintiff has supplied the goods as per the invoices, delivery challans exhibited by him and the defendant has accepted the delivery of goods and has failed to discharge the outstanding liability.
46. The PW1 deposed that there is no written contract in existence with the defendant. Usually the defendant was required to pay the invoice amount within 3 months from the date of respective invoices. The defendant was due in a some /18/ Com.O.S.No.1331/2022 of ₹.5,66,760/- during financial year 2018-19 (at the end of financial year 31.03.2019). Relevant to suit invoices he has not furnished details regarding the payments received from the defendants, as the defendants have made no payments in respect of suit invoices. The total of suit invoices is ₹.5,66,760/-. ₹.2,05,055/- was the opening balance for the financial year 2018-19 in respect of suit transaction. The plaintiff has received payments from the defendant during financial year 2018-19 in respect of previous invoices. The details of payments received from defendant No.1 are shown in Ex.P.24. The auditor of the plaintiff has prepared the ledger statement as per the Books of Account maintained by the plaintiff. He has not furnished statement of bank account for the financial year 2018-19. He has not furnished ledger extract for the period from 01.04.2019 to 31.03.2020, as there was no transaction in the account of defendant No.1.
47. He denied that though the defendants have not paid any amount as per receipt No.214, 220 and 225 respectively, the plaintiff has concocted the receipts to save the limitation to sue the defendant. He denied that Ex.P.32 is concocted to harass the defendant and to make wrongful gain at the cost of defendant.
/19/ Com.O.S.No.1331/2022
48. The PW1 has deposed that the defendant was required to make payment of the invoice amount within 1 month from the date of invoice failing which liable to pay interest @ 21% per annum as per condition No.8. The plaintiff has not received any documents from the defendants regarding delivery of materials. He has not issued any notice to the defendants within 1 month from the date of invoice calling upon them to make payment. He has not issued any notice demanding payment of overdue amount along with interest to the defendants. The defendant used to pay the amount within 4 months from the date of transactions. He has not collected interest on overdue amount in respect of previous transactions. He has not received payments in cash in respect of previous transactions.
49. The plaintiff and defendants have agreed that the defendants shall pay interest on the amount remained unpaid even after the expiry of one month from the date of invoice. The suit transaction is a commercial transaction. As such the parties are at liberty to fix the rate of interest payable on overdue amount. The Court shall give credence to the contractual obligations agreed by the parties which does not violate any law for the time being in force. In such circumstances, the defendant is liable to pay interest at 21% p.a. on the overdue amount.
/20/ Com.O.S.No.1331/2022
50. The defendant is contending that the suit is barred by limitation. The Plaintiff has concocted the receipts as per Ex.P16 to Ex.P18 to save the Limitation. The defendant has not made any payments as claimed by the plaintiff.
51. The plaintiff/PW1 deposed that Ex.P.16 to Ex.P.18 are generated in their systems regarding payments made by the defendants. He has not obtained signatures from the defendants or their representatives on payment receipts. He denied that he has concocted Ex.P.16 to Ex.P.18 only with a view to legalize the transactions. He denied that the defendants are not liable to pay the invoice amount as claimed by the plaintiff. He denied that he has not furnished ledger account extract for the period 2019-2020, as the defendants have not made any payments during that period. He denied that there is no basis for the ledger statement furnished by the plaintiff.
52. He denied that the suit is barred by limitation. He denied that the defendants are not liable to pay any amount to the plaintiff we have not issued any reply notice. He denied that the plaintiff has filed this suit based on concocted/self generated documents to make wrongful gain at the cost of defendants.
/21/ Com.O.S.No.1331/2022
53. The defendant except making unfounded allegations against the authenticity of document exhibited PW1 has failed to produce any documents in support of his defense. The Receipts exhibited by the Plaintiff as per Ex.P16 to Ex.P18 show that the defendant has made part payment in respect of outstanding dues. The suit is filed on 14.09.2022. In such circumstances the suit is not barred by limitation.
54. The plaintiff has established that the defendant No:2 and 3 being the partners of Defendant No;1 are jointly and severally liable to pay the suit claim along with current and future interest at 21% p.a. The suit is not barred by limitation. Accordingly, ISSUE No.1 and 2 are answered in the AFFIRMATIVE and ISSUE No.3 in the NEGATIVE.
55. Issue No.4: In view of my findings on Issue No:1 to 3, I pass the following:
ORDER The suit filed by plaintiff is hereby decreed with costs on the following terms.
The defendant is liable to pay the Plaintiff a sum of ₹.5,41,760/-(Rupees Five Lakhs Forty one Thousand Seven Hundred Sixty only) along with interest at 21% p.a. on ₹.5,41,760/-(Rupees Five Lakhs Forty one Thousand Seven Hundred Sixty /22/ Com.O.S.No.1331/2022 only) from the date of suit till the date of realization.
Draw decree accordingly.
The office is hereby directed to send a copy of the judgment to the plaintiff and the defendant through e-mail as per Order XX Rule 1 CPC as amended by Section 16 of Commercial Courts Act, 2015.
(Dictated to the Stenographer, typed by her then corrected, signed and then pronounced by me in the open court on 28th day of FEBRUARY 2024) (S.J.KRISHNA) LXXXIX ADDL.CITY CIVIL & SESSIONS JUDGE, BENGALURU.
(CCH-90) ANNEXURES List of witnesses examined for the plaintiff:
P.W.1 Sri.Narendra Narayana List of documents exhibited on behalf of the plaintiff:
Sl.No. Particulars of documents Ex.P.
1. Notarized copy of deed of partnership Ex.P.1 dated 15.12.2012
2. Invoice No.5230 dated 09.02.2019 Ex.P.2
3. E-way bill dated 09.02.2019 Ex.P.3 /23/ Com.O.S.No.1331/2022
4. Invoice No. 5235 dated 13.02.2019 Ex.P.4
5. E-way bill dated 13.02.2019 Ex.P.5
6. Invoice No.5240 dated 14.02.2019 Ex.P.6
7. E-way bill dated 14.02.2019 Ex.P.7
8. Lorry receipt issued by VRL dated Ex.P.8 11.02.2019
9. Track consignment details Ex.P.9
10. Lorry receipt issued by VRL dated Ex.P.10 14.02.2019
11. Track consignment details Ex.P.11
12. Courier receipt dated 20.02.2019 Ex.P.12
13. Lorry receipt issued by VRL dated Ex.P.13 14.02.2019
14. Track consignment details Ex.P.14
15. Courier receipt dated 18.02.2019 Ex.P.15
16. Payment receipt Bg.No.214 dated Ex.P.16 02.11.2020
17. Payment receipt Bg.No.220 dated Ex.P.17 03.11.2020
18. Payment receipt Bg.No.225 dated Ex.P.18 04.11.2020
19. Office copy of legal notice dated Ex.P.19 16.04.2022
20. Postal receipts (3 Nos.) Ex.P.20(a),
(b) & (c)
21. Postal acknowledgment (3 Nos.) Ex.P.21, 22 & 23
22. Ledger statement Ex.P.24
23. Non starter report dated 25.06.2022 Ex.P.25 issued in PIM 1167/2022 /24/ Com.O.S.No.1331/2022
24. 65B Certificate Ex.P.26
25. Copy of e-mail dated 18.08.2023 (2 Ex.P.27(a) Nos.) and 27(b)
26. Receipt issued by VRL Logistics dated Ex.P.28 28.08.2023
27. Consignee copy/VRL Ex.P.29
28. Consignee copy/VRL Ex.P.30
29. Consignee copy/VRL Ex.P.31
30. GST information Ex.P.32
31. 65B Certificate Ex.P.33 List of witnesses examined for the defendant/s:
Sri.Veera Venkataramana List of documents marked for the defendant/s: NIL (S.J.KRISHNA) LXXXIX ADDL.CITY CIVIL & SESSIONS JUDGE, BENGALURU.
(CCH-90)
****
Digitally signed
SJ by S J KRISHNA
KRISHNA Date: 2024.02.29
05:38:16 -0500