Delhi High Court
M/S Strategic Overseas Pvt Ltd vs M/S Ajs Builders Pvt Ltd on 16 October, 2014
Author: G.P. Mittal
Bench: G.P. Mittal
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Pronounced on: 16th October, 2014
+ CS(OS) 95/2011
M/S STRATEGIC OVERSEAS PVT LTD ..... Plaintiff
Through: Mr. Shailender Dahiya, Adv.
versus
M/S AJS BUILDERS PVT LTD ..... Defendant
Through: Ex-parte
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.P. MITTAL
G.P. Mittal, J. (Oral)
1. This suit for recovery of `23,62,787/- has been filed by the Plaintiff against the Defendant with the allegation that the Plaintiff had taken four plots, measuring 240 sq. yds. each in future projects of the Defendant. The amount in respect of the four plots totalling `18,71,515/- was paid on various dates through receipts executed by the Defendant as mentioned in paras 3 to 5 of the plaint.
2. It is averred that since the plots were not being allotted and the Plaintiff's Director found that there was no development at the site where the plots were to be carved out, the Plaintiff applied to the Defendant for refund of the amount.
CS(OS) No.95/2011 Page 1 of 3
3. It is the case of the Plaintiff that the Defendant asked the Plaintiff to return of the original receipts and supply copy of PAN card, NOC from the broker and signature verification from the bank, which were duly supplied by the Plaintiff to the Defendant by letter dated 06.03.2009 (mark P, Q,R and S). The Plaintiff also made several requests and personal visits but the amount paid was not refunded despite the promise made by the Defendant.
4. The Defendant filed written statement contesting the claim of the Plaintiff. By an order dated 28.09.2012 the learned counsel for the Defendant was directed to place on record the authority of the person who had purportedly signed the written statement as it was represented before the Joint Registrar that an unauthorised person had signed the written statement, which were later on retracted. The Defendant failed to file the authority, rather none appeared on behalf of the Defendant in the Court after 28.09.2012. The Defendant was, therefore, ordered to be proceeded ex-parte.
5. In ex-parte evidence, the Plaintiff has filed the Affidavit of Mr. Tarun Kumar Gupta, Director of the Plaintiff Ex.PW-1/A who has corroborated the averments made in the plaint. PW-1 also proved the documents Ex.PW-1/1 to Ex.PW-1/13.
CS(OS) No.95/2011 Page 2 of 3
6. Since the Defendant was ordered to be proceeded ex-parte, the testimony of PW-1 who has fully corroborated the averments made in the plaint has remained unchallenged and unrebutted.
7. In view of this, suit of the Plaintiff is decreed for `23,62,787/- with pendente lite and future interest @ 6% per annum.
8. A decree sheet be drawn accordingly.
9. Pending applications also stand disposed of.
(G.P. MITTAL) JUDGE OCTOBER 16, 2014 vk CS(OS) No.95/2011 Page 3 of 3