The appellant's failure to present evidence does not exempt contractual obligations; timely fulfillment is crucial in commercial contracts, and discrepancies must be addressed effectively and timely to invoke non-acceptance.

JUDGMENT :

Mini Pushkarna, J.

1. By way of this Regular First Appeal, the appellant/defendant no. 1/importer, has assailed the judgment and decree dated 22^nd March, 2014 (“impugned judgment”), passed by the Additional District Judge-10 (Central), Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi in Suit No. 144/2009, titled as “M/s. T.T. Limited Versus M/s. M. I. Textiles Pte. Ltd. and Anr.”. The said suit had been filed by the respondent no. 1/plaintiff/exporter, seeking recovery of Rs.11,80,245/-, along with interest, jointly and severally from the appellant and respondent no. 2/defendant no. 2.

2. The Trial Court, vide the impugned judgment, decreed the suit in favour of the respondent no. 1 and against the appellant, for a sum of Rs. 7,89,840/-, with interest @ 12% per annum from 01^st September, 2004 till the penultimate day of filing of the suit. Additionally, further interest was awarded in favour of respondent no. 1 on the aforesaid amount from the date of filing the suit till realization, @ 12% per annum. The suit was, however, dismissed against respondent no. 2.

3. During the pendency of the present appeal, the appellant also filed an application, being CM APPL. 3794/2015 under Order XLI Rule 27, read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (“CPC”), seeking permission to produce additional evidence by recalling Shri Sunil Kumar Mahnot (PW 1) for his cross-examination. There is further prayer to permit the appellant to lead defence evidence.

4. In pursuance of the order dated 15^th January, 2016 of this Court, wherein, it was directed that the application, being CM APPL. 3794/2015, would be taken up at the time of hearing of the appeal, the said application shall also be decided by way of the present judgment.

5. The facts, leading to filing of the present appeal, are as follows:

5.1 The appellant is a company incorporated under the laws of Singapore and is, inter alia, engaged in the business of international trading of cotton, textiles and other items. The respondent no. 1 is a company registered under the Companies Act, 1956, and is the owner of 100% export oriented spinning mills, carrying on the business of manufacturing, trading, exporting hosiery, yarn, fabrics, textiles, etc.

5.2 The appellant had placed an order for 20,000 kgs @US $ 3.20 per kg of 100% Cotton Fabric NE 26/1 Combed Hosiery Rib Fabric Dia 30 Inches, Gauge 18, Stitch Length 2.7' with respondent no. 1, with 10% plus/minus allowed in quantity and value. For the said order, the appellant got issued a Letter of Credit bearing No. LCF040162 (“LoC”) dated 01 ^st March, 2004, for a total value of US $55,890 from the Connaught Place, New Delhi branch of the respondent no. 2 bank, i.e., the Indian Overseas Bank/issuing bank.

5.3 An additional order was placed by a representative of the appellant on respondent no.1 for supply of 8500 kgs @US $3.52 per kg of „100% Cotton Fabric NE 38/1 Combed Hosiery Interlock Grey Knitted Fabric Dia 30” Gauge 23' and 1496.88 kg @US $3.22 per kg of „NE 38/1 Combed Hosiery Waxed Cotton Yarn - 33 Cartons x 45.36 kg, Total - 1x20' FCL', with 10% plus/minus allowed in quantity and value. Accordingly, the LoC was amended to increase the amount of credit thereunder from US $55,890