HIGH COURT OF DELHI
DEEPALI DESIGNS AND EXHIBITS PRIVATE LIMITED – Appellant
Versus
ENCOMPASS EVENTS PRIVATE LIMITED – Respondent
CS(COMM)-56/2020
CS(COMM)56/2020 Page 1 of 19
*
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Date of Reserve: 29th July, 2022
Date of Decision: 10th October, 2022
+
CS(COMM) 56/2020
DEEPALI DESIGNS AND EXHIBITS PRIVATE LIMITED
having its Registered office at
1st and 2nd floor, Plot No. 17,
Central Market, Punjabi Bagh
(West), Delhi-110026
..... Plaintiff
Through:
Mr. Raghvendra Singh, Mr. Abhishek
Gupta and Mr. Varun Agarwal,
Advocates.
versus
ENCOMPASS EVENTS PRIVATE LIMITED
having its registered office at Mez & Floor,
A-83 Okhla Industrial Area,
Okhla Ph-II, Delhi - 110020
(previously at Khasra No. 584
Main Extension Fatehpur Beri, Delhi - 110074)
..... Defendant
Through:
Mr. Ashutosh Kumar, Mr. K.P.
Jayaram and Mr. Pulkit Aggarwal,
Advocates.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NEENA BANSAL KRISHNA
J U D G E M E N T
I.A.1529/2022
1. An application under Section XIIIA of Code of Civil Procedure, 1908
(hereinafter referred to as “CPC”) has been filed on behalf of the plaintiff
for Summary Judgment.
This is a digitally signed Judgement.
NEUTRAL CITATION NO: 2022/DHC/004106
CS(COMM)56/2020 Page 2 of 19
2. The facts in brief are that in October, 2018 the defendant approached
the plaintiff in Delhi for supply of infrastructure and services for “Pravasi
Bhartiya Divas-2019” to be held from 21st January, 2019 to 23rd January,
2019 at Varanasi, Uttar Pradesh. Various correspondences were exchanged
for negotiations between October, 2018 to December, 2018 which resulted
into an Agreement dated 27th December, 2018 through e-mail which
recorded the scope of infrastructure and services to be supplied by the
plaintiff and the consideration to be paid by the defendant was decided as
₹12,98,00,000/- inclusive of Goods and Service Tax (GST). The payment
schedule was agreed as under:
3. On 29th December, 2018 the Billing Department of the defendant
prepared a draft written Agreement describing the agreed scope of
infrastructure and services, but proposed the different timing of payment viz:
This is a digitally signed Judgement.
NEUTRAL CITATION NO: 2022/DHC/004106
CS(COMM)56/2020 Page 3 of 19
4. The plaintiff protested to the unilateral variation in the timing of
payment by the Billing Department of the defendant as the contract between
the parties already stood concluded. Discussions were again held between
the plaintiff and the Authorized Representative of the defendant over the
telephone on 01stJanuary, 2019 and the payment schedule as agreed on 27th
December, 2018 was reaffirmed and reiterated. The defendant consequently
withdrew the draft Agreement, and the parties did not sign the said
Agreement.
5. The Purchase Order No. DOPO18120145 dated 31st December, 2018
was sent by the Billing Department of the defendant to the plaintiff on 3rd
January, 2019 for the purpose of preparing the invoice and payment of GST.
Since, this Purchase Order was prepared on 31st December, 2018 i.e. prior to
the telephonic conversation between the parties on 01st January, 2019, it
contained the payment term as was proposed in the draft Agreement. At this
stage it was agreed and understood between the parties that the payment
terms as agreed in the e-mail annexed dated 27th December, 2018 and as
reiterated and agreed by the parties on 01st January, 2019 shall be binding on
the parties. The plaintiff successfully executed his contract and “Pravasi
Bhartiya Divas-2019” was successfully held from 21st January, 2019 to 23rd
January, 2019 at Varanasi, Uttar Pradesh. The plaintiff on the request of
defendant supplied additional infrastructure and services at the agreed cost
of ₹57,23,000/- inclusive