Prathiba M. Singh, J.

The present appeal has been filed challenging the decree and judgment passed in a suit filed under Order XXXVII CPC. The Respondent/Plaintiff (hereinafter, "Plaintiff") is a supplier of fruits and vegetables to the Appellant/Defendant (hereinafter, "Defendant"), which runs a hotel, namely, Hotel Cross Roads, Sector 15, Part-II, Chandan Nagar, Near IIT College, Gurgaon- 122001. The case of the Plaintiff is that it made continuous supplies of fruits and vegetables to the Defendant for its hotel, upto 31st December, 2015 and payment of a sum of Rs.7,64,171/- remained outstanding. The Plaintiff relies on copies of the bills, vouchers, ledger accounts, etc, which, according to the Plaintiff, bear the acknowledgement of the Defendant.

2. The reliefs prayed for in the suit are as under:

(a) To pass a decree of Rs. 7,64,171/- (RUPEES SEVEN LAC SIXTY FOUR THOUSAND ONE HUNDRED SEVENTY ONE ONLY) in favour of the plaintiff and against the Defendant;

(b) Award pendentelite and future interest @ 18% per annum from the date of institution of the present suit till the realization of the decretal amount in favour of the plaintiff and against the defendant.

(c) Cost of the suit and litigation charges also may be awarded in favour of the plaintiff and against the defendant."

3. The Trial Court issued summons in the suit. The Defendant filed its leave to defend application. After hearing the parties, vide judgement dated 10th April, 2017, the suit was decreed in the following terms:

"7 Plaintiff has prima-facie proved on record that he is entitled to the amount as he has supplied the goods for which payment has not been made. No case of leave to defend is made out. The defendant is not entitled to any leave to defend. Accordingly, the leave to defend application of the defendant is hereby dismissed. The suit of the plaintiff is hereby decreed for an amount of Rs.7,64,171/- (Rs. Seven lacs sixty four thousand one hundred and seventy one only) alongwith cost and interest @ 10% pa from the filing of the suit i.e. 16.12.2015 till the realisation of the decreetal amount."

Case of the Plaintiff

4. The Plaintiff's position is that the Defendant had contacted the Plaintiff and had sought a quotation for supply of fruits and vegetables and a price list was called for. The quotation sent by the Plaintiff was then accepted by the Defendant. The Plaintiff started making supplies from March, 2014. The last supply contract was entered into for a period till June, 2016. The payment for the supplies was to be made within every 45 days, however, the Defendant was irregular in its payments. After giving credit to the payments which were received by the Plaintiff, the outstanding balance was a sum of Rs. 7,64,171/-. Some part-payment was made by cheques but only cheques of Rs. 82,000/- were honoured and the remaining cheques were dishonoured. Along with the suit, the Plaintiff placed on record copies of the quotations/price list issued by it to the Defendant. The contracts for the periods from 1st July, 2014 to 30th June, 2015, and from 1 st July, 2015 to 30th June, 2016, various copies of the invoices and copies of the cheques, as also the ledger account, have been placed on record. The Plaintiff also placed on record copy of the legal notice dated 2nd November, 2015.

Case of the Defendant

5. The Defendant, in the leave to defend application claimed that the suit was bad for misjoinder/non-joinder of parties and on the ground of territorial jurisdiction. According to the Defendant, the outstanding amount was Rs.29,537/-. It also took the stand that a settlement was arrived at between the parties, whereby a total sum of Rs. 96,000/- was paid to the Plaintiff.

The Defendant categorically denied the account statement filed by the Plaintiff.

Trial Court judgment

6. The Trial Court, after perusing the applications and hearing the parties, arrived at the following conclusions:

The Defendant had issued a total of 6 cheques for the outstanding amount, how