Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

pledged quantity of the cargo. Further, learned MM misinterpreted and wrongly applied the judgment passed in M/s Collage Culture & Ors. V Apparel Export Promotion Council & Anr. 2007 (4) JCC 388. It is further stated that liability is less than Rs.20 crores and the cheque was of Rs.23 crore. Further, as per Section 65B of Indian Evidence Act, the statement of account which is a computer generated record cannot be proved. However, the ground w.r.t. the non-receipt of notice was not pressed.

19.On the other hand, learned counsel for respondent submitted that the appellant had firmed up the order with the over-seas supplier and only thereafter, they had approached the respondent to facilitate import. The import was done on their behalf and the LC was opened. At the time of opening of LC, the liability was incurred by the respondent on behalf of the appellants. Agreement Ex.CW1/1 was entered into on 25.10.2008 and liability was admitted on 07.10.2009. The liability was admitted even in the cross-examination. He further submitted that since the objection under Section 65B Indian Evidence Act was not taken at the M/s Shreeji Overseas Pvt. Ltd. Vs. M/s PEC Page No. 12 of 45 :: 13 ::

41.Coming to the other cited judgment of Indus Airways (supra). The same is not applicable to the facts of the present case. In the said case, purchase order was made and post-dated cheques for advance payment was issued. Subsequently, the purchase orders were cancelled requesting the return of the cheques. No goods were delivered. Therefore, the same is not applicable to the facts of the present case.

42.As regards the statement of account, it submitted that same is copy of the ledger print-out taken from the computer and without certificate under Section 65B Indian Evidence Act, the same cannot be proved and learned counsel cited P.V. Anvar V Bashir Ahmad (2014) 10 SCC 473. On the other hand, learned counsel M/s Shreeji Overseas Pvt. Ltd. Vs. M/s PEC Page No. 43 of 45 :: 44 ::

for respondent submitted that the computer print-out were taken and, thereafter, they were signed, sealed and attested by respondent. Therefore, there is no application of certificate under Section 65B Indian Evidence Act and cited R.V.E. Venkatachala Gounder (supra). It is submitted that since no objection was raised at the time of admitting the documents in evidence, it cannot be raised at the stage of appeal or final arguments. The legal position however, after P.V. Bashir's case (supra) has completely changed and makes the document not admissible in evidence, if the same does not comply with conditions of Section 65B Indian Evidence Act. Admittedly, the certificate under Section 65B Indian Evidence Act has not been filed, therefore, the same cannot be looked into. However, from the correspondence made on behalf of the respondent dated 17.12.2009, Ex.CW1/22, the amount due is mentioned as Rs.19,41,91,636/- and beneath the same, note is appended to the effect that interest accrued on delayed payment in terms of associateship agreement dated 15.07.2008 will be calculated at the time of final payment. The receipt of the said letter has not been disputed and the appellant no. 2 has although, entered into witness box, but failed to show their own statement of account to contradict the same.