Delhi District Court
In Reference vs M/S Print Land India on 30 July, 2022
IN THE COURT OF SH. KUMAR RAHUL : CIVIL JUDGE :
NORTH DISTRICT, ROHINI COURTS : DELHI
Suit No. 377 /18
CNR No. DLNT030007292018
In reference:
M/s V.K. Box Industries
Through its proprietor
Sh. Naresh Malhotra
Office at B99, G.T. Karnal Road
Industrial Area
New Shakti Nagar
Telephone Exchange
Delhi110033 ........... Plaintiff
VERSUS
M/s Print Land India
Through its proprietor
Sh. Shyam Gupta
A2, G.T. Karnal Raod
Industrial Area
Azadpur
Delhi110033 .........Defendant
Date of Institution : 27.03.2018
Date of reservation of Judgment : 08.06.2022
CS SCJ No. 377/18 V.K. Box Industries Vs. Shyam Gupta Page 1 of 9
Date of Judgment : 30.07.2022
EXPARTE J U D G M E N T
1. The present suit was initially filed under Order XXXVII CPC by the
plaintiff against the defendant for recovery of Rs. 1,50,523/.
Thereafter, defendant was served on 10.01.2019 and vide order dated
30.01.2019, one opportunity was given to the defendant to file WS,
therefore, it is implied that the present suit is treated as ordinary suit
for recovery.
FACTS AS PER THE PLAINT :
2. The case of the plaintiff as per plaint in brief is that plaintiff is a sole proprietor of M/s. V.K. Box Industries having its office At B99, G.T. Karnal Road, Industrial Area, New Shakti Nagar, Telephone Exchange, Delhi110033 and reputed printer and is working of printing on contract basis.
3. It is further case of the plaintiff that defendant approached to plaintiff at his office and requested him to print the goods for yourself on credit basis. It was agreed between the defendant and plaintiff that firstly the plaintiff will supply the printed goods to the defendant and will raise the bills and after the receiving of the printed goods, the defendant will clear bills amount within 10 days.
CS SCJ No. 377/18 V.K. Box Industries Vs. Shyam Gupta Page 2 of 94. It is further case of the plaintiff that in the course of business the defendant has given a contract for printing of the goods to the plaintiff and after competition of printing the plaintiff raised a bill for a sum of Rs. 1,50,523/. The defendant issued a cheque bearing no. 037861 dated 29.09.2017 drawn on State Bank of India, G.T. Karnal Road, Industrial Area, Delhi to the plaintiff towards the full payment of the work done by the plaintiff. Thereafter, upon the presentation of the aforesaid said cheque, the said cheque was dishonoured returned with remark "FUNDS INSUFFICIENT". When the said fact was brought to knowledge of defendant, the defendant felt sorry and requested to the plaintiff to present the said chque again with assurance that said will be honoured. Thereafter, upon again presentation of the aforesaid said cheque, the said cheque was again dishonoured returned with remark "FUNDS INSUFFICIENT" vide returned memo dated 29.10.2017.
5. It is further case of the plaintiff that the plaintiff has already sent the statement of account to the defendant. Plaintiff had also written a letter dated 08.12.2017 to defendant informing the dishonour of the said cheque issued by the defendant which has been duly acknowledged by the defendant. Despite receiving the said letter, defendant did not pay any amount to the plaintiff. Thereafter, plaintiff served a legal notice dated 01.03.2018 to the defendant. Despite the service of legal notice, defendant refused to make any payment. Hence, the present suit has been filed.
CS SCJ No. 377/18 V.K. Box Industries Vs. Shyam Gupta Page 3 of 9RELIEF:
6. Following reliefs have been sought on behalf of the plaintiff in the plaint:
(a)That a decree of recovery amount of Rs. 1,50,523/ alongwith interest @ 24% p.a. may be passed in favour of the plaintiff and against the defendant..
DEFENCE :
7. In the present case, the defendant has been served on 10.01.2019, however, neither the defendant has appeared nor filed WS. Accordingly, right to file WS was closed vide order dated 25.03.2019 and vide order dated 25.02.2021, matter was proceeded exparte qua defendant.
ISSUES:
8. No issues have been framed in the present matter.
DOCUMENTS & EVIDENCE:
9. In support of its case of the plaintiff examined Shri Naresh Malhotra as PW1, who tendered his exparte evidence by way of affidavit Ex. PW1/1 bearing his signatures at point A & B and relied upon following documents:
1.Ex. PW1/A is the original cheque , dated 29.09.2017 drawn on SBI.
CS SCJ No. 377/18 V.K. Box Industries Vs. Shyam Gupta Page 4 of 92.Ex. PW 1/B is the bank return memo dated 29.11.2017.
3.Ex. PW 1/C is the office copy of legal notice dated 01.03.2018.
4.Ex. PW 1/D is the postal receipt and return envelope.
5.Ex. PW1/E is the tax invoice dated 07.09.2017.
10. In support of its case of the plaintiff has also examined Shri Chandan Kumar as PW2, who tendered his exparte evidence by way of affidavit Ex. PW2/1 bearing his signatures at point A & B and relied upon following documents:
(a) Ex.PW2/A (OSR) is the copy of employment ID Card.
(b) Mark A is the copy of letter dated 08.12.2017 issued by plaintiff.
FINAL ARGUMENTS:
11. Exparte final arguments have been heard at length on behalf of the plaintiff.
FINDINGS OF THE COURT:
12.Section 101 of the Evidence Act, 1872 defines "burden of proof" and lays down that the burden of proving a fact always lies upon the person who asserts the facts. Therefore, the burden of proof always lies on the plaintiff initially to prove the facts alleged by him. This principle of law remains the same even in cases where the suit has been proceeded exparte qua the defendant.
CS SCJ No. 377/18 V.K. Box Industries Vs. Shyam Gupta Page 5 of 913. The law with regard to burden of proof of plaintiff in case of exparte proceeding has been well settled in a plethora of judgments of the Hon'ble Supreme Court. Though, the burden of proof on the plaintiff in exparte proceeding is not very heavy, but the necessity of proof by the plaintiff of his case to the satisfaction of the court cannot be dispensed with. The Hon'ble Apex Court in Ramesh Chand Ardawatiya v. Anil Panjwani, (2003) 7 SCC 350 explained the law with regard to burden of proof of plaintiff in an exparte suit. The observations of the Hon'ble Apex court may be reproduced herewith as follows: "Even if the suit proceeds ex parte and in the absence of a written statement, unless the applicability of Order 8 Rule 10 CPC is attracted and the court acts thereunder, the necessity of proof by the plaintiff company of his case to the satisfaction of the court cannot be dispensed with. In the absence of denial of plaint averments the burden of proof on the plaintiff company is not very heavy. A prima facie proof of the relevant facts constituting the cause of action would suffice and the court would grant the plaintiff company such relief as to which he may in law be found entitled. In a case which has proceeded ex parte the court is not bound to frame issues under Order 14 and deliver the judgment on every issue as required by Order 20 Rule 5. Yet the trial court should scrutinize the CS SCJ No. 377/18 V.K. Box Industries Vs. Shyam Gupta Page 6 of 9 available pleadings and documents, consider the evidence adduced, and would do well to frame the "points for determination" and proceed to construct the ex parte judgment dealing with the points at issue one by one. Merely because the defendant is absent the court shall not admit evidence the admissibility whereof is excluded by law nor permit its decision being influenced by irrelevant or inadmissible evidence."
14. In order to prove its case, plaintiff has led evidence through PW1, Shri M.L. Malhotra. In his testimony, he has referred to documents viz. Ex. PW1/A is the original cheque , dated 29.09.2017 drawn on SBI, Ex. PW 1/B is the bank return memo dated 29.11.2017, Ex. PW 1/C is the office copy of legal notice dated 01.03.2018, Ex. PW 1/D is the postal receipt and return envelope and Ex. PW1/E is the tax invoice dated 07.09.2017. In order to prove its case, plaintiff has also led evidence through PW2, Shri Chandan Kumar. In his testimony, he has referred to documents viz. Ex.PW2/A (OSR) is the copy of employment ID Card and Mark A is the copy of letter dated 08.12.2017 issued by plaintiff.
15.The testimony of PW1 Sh. Naresh Malhotra and PW2 Sh. Chandan Kumar remained unconverted, unchallenged and duly corroborated by relevant documents, hence, there is no reason to disbelieve the said testimony. The present suit has been filed within the period of CS SCJ No. 377/18 V.K. Box Industries Vs. Shyam Gupta Page 7 of 9 limitation. In exparte suits, where defendant does not file a written statement or does not appear to contest the case, the plaintiff as well as the court proceeds on the basis that there was no real opposition to put forth. Hence, the plaintiff is required only to prove a prima facie case, which in my considered view has been successfully done by the plaintiff in this case. It has been proved by the plaintiff that the defendant has failed to pay outstanding/dues of Rs 1,50,523/, therefore, this Court is of the considered view that the plaintiff is entitled to recover Rs 1,50,523/ from the defendant.
16.The plaintiff has claimed interest @ 24% p.a. This Court is of the considered view that if interest @ 6% p.a. is granted to the plaintiff, it would meet the ends of the justice. Therefore, interest is granted to the plaintiff @ 6% p.a. from the date filing of suit i.e. 27.03.2018 till its realization.
17.In the light of the above discussion and reasons therein, the suit of the plaintiff is decreed for a sum of Rs 1,50,523/ ( Rs. One Lakh Fifty Thousand Five Hundred and Twenty Three Only) alongwith interest @ 6% p.a. from the date of filing of suit i.e. 27.03.2018 till its realization. Costs of the suit are also decreed in the favour of the plaintiff and against the defendant.
18.Decree sheet be prepared accordingly.
CS SCJ No. 377/18 V.K. Box Industries Vs. Shyam Gupta Page 8 of 919. File be consigned to the record room after necessary compliance.
Digitally signed by KUMAR Announced in the open KUMAR RAHUL
RAHUL Date:
2022.07.30
Court on 30.07.2022 14:58:22 +0530
(KUMAR RAHUL)
CIVIL JUDGE (NORTH)
ROHINI/DELHI/30.07.2022
CS SCJ No. 377/18 V.K. Box Industries Vs. Shyam Gupta Page 9 of 9