ORDER :

This civil revision petition is directed as against the fair and decretal order passed in IA.No.3742 of 2014 in OS.No.1314 of 2014 on the file of the learned XV Additional Judge, City Civil Court, Chennai thereby dismissing the petition to pass judgment and decree for a sum of Rs.11,09,000/- on admission by the defendants.

2. The petitioner is the plaintiff. The respondents are the defendants. The petitioner filed suit for recovery of Rs.12,36,151/- with interest as against the respondents herein. According to the petitioner, he supplied desktops to M/s.Vel Tech Institution as per the order placed by the respondents from the month of July 2012 to October 2013. On receipt of desktops, on the basis of the orders placed by them, the respondents committed default in payment of amount due. In fact the cheques issued by the respondents were also dishonoured on several occasions. Though the respondents failed to make payment, they admitted their liability by their letter dated 28.10.2013 and 30.10.2013 to the extent of Rs.12,36,151/-. They also undertook to pay the said amount on or before 31.12.2013 failing which the petitioner can take legal action to recover the same as against the respondent. Thereafter, the respondents did not make any payment as undertaken by them. Therefore the respondents categorically admitted their liability to the extent of Rs.12,36,151/- and as such the petitioner sought for judgment on admission under Order 12 Rule 6 of CPC. It was dismissed and aggrieved by the same, the petitioner preferred this revision petition.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the admission of facts have to be in either pleadings or other ways. There is clear admission made by the respondents in the letter dated 28.10.2013 and 30.10.2013 which were marked as Ex.P.24 and P.25. Though the petitioner marked Ex.P.1 to P.34 in support of his application, those are not appended in the fair order. Therefore, the court below without perusal of the documents and without making any discussion dismissed the petition for the only reason that there are so many issues involved and are triable in nature. The statement of account of the respondents marked as Ex.P.34 in which the outstanding amount arrived at Rs.12,36,151/-. It also clearly shows that the cheques issued by the respondents were dishonoured for the reason insufficient funds. Ex.P.24 letter dated 28.10.2013 issued by the respondents categorically admitted their liability by stating that they have transferred sum of Rs.24 lakhs through RTGS on 25.10.2013 and the balance as on date stands at Rs.11,09,000/-. They have discussed on 26th day of October at the plaintiff's office and they hereby admitted that they shall duly compensate the plaintiff towards interest component for the delayed payment. Further stated that they shall clear plaintiff's old outstanding payment by 31.12.2013, failing which the plaintiff may be at liberty to initiate suitable legal proceedings for recovery of the dues. He further submitted that in Ex.P.25 dated 30.10.2013, clearly mentioned that outstanding as on 25.10.2013 was at Rs.9,59,536/-. It also correlates with the statement of accounts which was marked as Ex.P34. Therefore, the respondents categorically admitted their liability to the tune to the extent of Rs.11,09,000/- and the suit is to be decreed on their admission. In support of his contention, he relied upon the judgments in the case of Uttam Singh Duggal & Co Ltd. Vs. United Bank of India and others reported in (2000) 7 SCC 120 and Dr.K.Padmanabhan and another Vs. W.S.Nisha reported in 2002-3 LW 118.

4. Per contra, the learned counsel for the respondents submitted that there is no admission at all in the letters dated 28.10.2013 and 30.10.2013 marked as Ex.P.24 and Ex.P25. It revealed that the transactions held between the petitioner and the respondents, amount outstanding and the further correspondence that have occurred between them. It would also reveal that the assuran