Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
MANMOHAN SINGH, J.
M/S HINDUSTAN PLYWOOD COMPANY - Plaintiff
Versus
RISHI AHUJA - Defendant
CS(OS) 668/2012
Decided on : 24th August, 2015
Recovery - Partnership Firm - Indian Partnership Act - Order XXXVII CPC - [Indian Partnership Act] - [Section 65B of Evidence Act] - The court passed a decree in favor of the plaintiff for recovery of a sum of Rs.29,68,254/- along with pendente lite and future interest against the defendant. The court found that the plaintiff proved its case against the defendant as per the averments made in the plaint. The interest claimed at 24% per annum was considered on the higher side by the court.
Fact of the Case:
The plaintiff, a partnership firm, filed a suit for recovery of a sum of Rs.29,68,254/- along with pendente lite and future interest against the defendant, a sole proprietor of a business who had purchased goods on credit from the plaintiff.
Finding of the Court:
The court passed a decree in favor of the plaintiff for the recovery of the claimed amount along with interest, as the plaintiff proved its case against the defendant.
Issues: Recovery of unpaid price of goods, interest, and legal notice fee from the defendant.
Ratio Decidendi: The court found in favor of the plaintiff based on the evidence presented, including the ledger accounts, dishonored cheque, and confirmation of outstanding dues by the defendant.
Final Decision: A decree for a sum of Rs.29,68,254/- was passed in favor of the plaintiff and against the defendant along with pendente lite and future interest at 12% per annum till realization of the decreetal amount.
MANMOHAN SINGH, J.
1. The present suit has been filed by the plaintiff under Order XXXVII CPC for recovery of a sum of Rs.29,68,254/- along with pendente lite and future interest against the defendant.
2. The defendant did not appear despite of service. No appearance was filed by the defendant on 28th January, 2015 and hence, the defendant was proceeded ex parte. Ex parte evidence by way of affidavit of Rajiv Sapra as Ex.PW1/A has been adduced in view of order passed on 28th January, 2015.
3. It is stated in the plaint that the plaintiff is a partnership firm registered under the Indian Partnership Act with Registrar of Firms and Shri K.K. Sapra S/o Late Shri Daulat Ram Sapra is one of the partners of the plaintiff.
4. The defendant is a sole proprietor of M/s. Silver Mark Interiors who had purchased on credit various products from the plaintiff as mentioned in the bills from 26th February, 2010 to 20th May, 2010 from its Paharganj Shop, New Delhi.
5. The details of which are exhibited and are as under :
S.No.
Bill No.
Date
Amount
1.
TI-998
26.02.2010
4219/-
Ex.PW1/2
2.
TI-997
26.02.2010
1,19,086/-
Ex.PW1/3
3.
TI-1039
10.03.2010
1,29,967/-
Ex.PW1/4
4.
TI-1074
22.03.2010
2,46,870/-
Ex.PW1/5
5.
TI-1076
22.03.2010
20,342/-
Ex.PW1/6
6.
TI-1078
22.03.2010
1,40,526/-
Ex.PW1/7
7.
TI-1079
22.03.2010
25,995/-
Ex.PW1/8
8.
TI-1080
22.03.2010
3,375/-
Ex.PW1/9
9.
TI-1081
22.03.2010
19,926/-
Ex.PW1/10
10.
TI-1088
23.03.2010
73,686/-
Ex.PW1/11
11.
TI-1132
31.03.2010
5,00,686/-
Ex.PW1/12
12.
TI-1137
31.03.2010
53,406/-
Ex.PW1/13
13.
TI-1139
31.03.2010
10,651/-
Ex.PW1/14
14.
TI-1138
30.03.2010
71,156/-
Ex.PW1/15
15.
TI-1140
31.03.2010
1,40,112/-
Ex.PW1/16
16.
TI-1151
31.03.2010
9,447/-
Ex.PW1/17
17.
TI-1155
31.03.2010
9,108/-
Ex.PW1/18
18.
TI-1135
31.03.2010
4,219/-
Ex.PW1/19
19.
TI-1208
03.04.2010
4,163/-
Ex.PW1/20
20.
TI-1209
03.04.2010
7,728/-
Ex.PW1/21
21.
TI-1222
06.04.2010
99,216/-
Ex.PW1/22
22.
TI-1223
06.04.2010
2,888/-
Ex.PW1/23
23.
TI-1224
06.04.2010
5,34,276/-
Ex.PW1/24
24.
TI-1243
10.04.2010
4,67,492/-
Ex.PW1/25
25.
TI-1231
08.04.2010
12,845/-
Ex.PW1/26
26.
TI-1246
10.04.2010
10,196/-
Ex.PW1/27
27.
TI-1305
23.04.2010
1,628/-
Ex.PW1/28
28.
TI-1336
01.05.2010
5,694/-
Ex.PW1/29
29.
TI-1337
01.05.2010
7,613/-
Ex.PW1/30
30.
TI-1356
05.05.2010
40,488/-
Ex.PW1/31
31.
TI-1355
05.05.2010
2,11,812/-
Ex.PW1/32
32.
TI-1397
10.05.2010
2,18,100/-
Ex.PW1/33
33.
TI-1439
18.05.2010
2,455/-
Ex.PW1/34
34.
TI-1445
20.05.2010
1,575/-
Ex.PW1/35
6. The defendant purchased the goods on credit amounting to Rs.32,59,709/- from the plaintiff and had paid part payment of Rs.11,43,455/- leaving the balance unpaid price of goods of Rs.21,26,254/- due to the plaintiff.
7. As claimed, a sum of Rs.21,16,254/- as balance unpaid price of the goods and Rs.8,46,500/- as interest @ 24% per annum and Rs.5,500/- as legal notice fee i.e. total Rs.29,68,254/- has become due to the plaintiff from the defendant and the defendant failed to pay despite service of legal notice of demand dated 9th December, 2011 by speed post A.D. at the address of the defendant, hence the present suit. Copy of the legal notice is exhibited as Ex.PW1/36. Copy of the Post receipt and returned Envelope is exhibited as Ex.PW1/37 colly.
8. The plaintiff is maintaining books of account in usual course of business and there is running and open account of defendant which is op
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
