THE HONOURABLE DR.JUSTICE G.RADHA RANI C.C.C.A.No.157 of 2002

JUDGMENT:

This appeal is filed by the appellant - defendant No.2 aggrieved by the judgment and decree dated 29.12.2001 passed in O.S.No.952 of 1993 by the learned V Senior Civil Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad.

2. The respondent No.1 is the plaintiff and the respondent No.2 is the defendant No.1. The appeal was dismissed for default against respondent No.2 - defendant No.1 on 21.10.2011.

3. The parties are hereinafter referred as arrayed before the trial court.

4. The respondent No.1 - plaintiff initially filed the suit against the defendant No.2 alone for recovery of an amount of Rs.4,22,769/- under Order XXXVII Rule 2 of CPC which contemplates summary procedure. Subsequently he impleaded the respondent No.2 - defendant No.1 as per the orders in I.A.No.1799 of 2000 dated 15.02.2001.

5. The plaintiff contended that the plaintiff was a registered firm carrying on business of supplying poultry feed under the name and style of M/s.Sri Satya Sai Chemicals and Feeds represented by its proprietor Sri K.V.S.S.Prasad Rao and the defendant was a company represented by Sri Y.Mohan Rao doing business of poultry under the name and style of M/s.Mosaic Farms Private Limited. The defendant was in need of poultry feed and approached the plaintiff and requested him to supply poultry feed for his poultry farm. The plaintiff was having good business in the market and possessing good reputation and demanded the defendant to deposit some amount as advance. But the defendant promised to the plaintiff that payments would be made by them very promptly and requested to make regular supplies of poultry feed to his poultry farm. The plaintiff believing the defendant made the supplies of poultry feed of specified quality and quantity since then. The defendant regularly received the material supplied by the plaintiff and became a regular customer, but never paid the bills regularly. The plaintiff raised the respective bills of the material supplied by them against the defendant to which the defendant part paid the amount every time leaving some dues in the bills. The defendant always expressed his satisfaction towards the standard, quantity and quality of the material supplied by the plaintiff and never had any complaint whatsoever against the supplies made to him. The defendant on 14.11.1991 approached the plaintiff and pleaded that his farm was in financial problems and that he could not make immediate payment of the bills and requested the plaintiff not to stop the supplies to his farm till 07.12.1991 and that he would make the payments on or before 08.12.1991 for the bills to be drawn upon him until

07.12.1991. On repeated requests and pleadings of the defendant, the plaintiff consented and made the requested supplies promptly from time to time till 07.12.1991. On 08.12.1991, the plaintiff demanded the defendant to pay the bills drawn upon him and the due amount of Rs.11,998/- immediately. The defendant did not choose to give any response to the plaintiff's demand. The plaintiff submitted that they contacted the defendant number of times and demanded to pay the due amount. On each occasion, the defendant merely promised to pay and gained time, but never cared to pay the total due amount of Rs.4,22,769/- with interest @ 18 % per annum on the principal amount of Rs.3,23,346/-. Annoyed with the conduct of the defendant, the plaintiff issued a notice dated 28.01.1992 demanding the defendant to make the payment immediately. The plaintiff further averred that the defendant issued a reply notice admitting the supply of poultry feed by the plaintiff worth of Rs.3,23,346/- and that he was due to pay the money, but maliciously alleged that the plaintiff had promised a discount of 5% and fraudulently alleged that the material supplied by the plaintiff was of sub-standard. The plaintiff being alerted by the malicious intention of the defendant, issued a second notice demanding the defendant to make the