Calcutta High Court
Abp Private Limited vs Manish Duggar on 10 November, 2022
1
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
(Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction)
ORIGINAL SIDE
Present:
The Hon'ble Justice Krishna Rao
CS 129 of 2021
ABP Private Limited
Versus
Manish Duggar
Mr. Soumabho Ghose
Mr. Soumitra Datta
Ms. Tiana Bhattacharyya
Ms. Arti Bhattacharyya
.....For the Plaintiff
Heard on : 30.08.2022
Judgment on : 10.11.2022
Krishna Rao, J.:
The plaintiff has filed the instant suit praying for a decree for a sum of
Rs. 2,69,82,745/- along with interim interest and interest upon judgment @
12% per annum.
Initially, the defendant had appeared but had not filed written
statement and subsequently, the defendant had filed an application being
GA 2 of 2022 for extension of time for filing written statement but on
2
29.04.2022
the same was dismissed as withdrawn. On 10.05.2022 again the
matter was listed but none appeared for the defendant and for the interest of
justice, the case was adjourned till 08.06.2022. On 08.06.2022 also none
appeared on behalf of the defendant and no written statement was filed
accordingly, this Court has fixed the matter as 'undefended suit'.
The plaintiff is carrying the business of printing and publishing of
newspapers namely 'Anandabazar Patrika' and 'The Telegraph' as well as
magazines namely 'Sananda', 'Anandamela', 'Anandalok' and 'Desh'.
The defendant is carrying on business of an advertisement agency
under the name and style of SK. Advertising and Company. The defendant
acts as principal to publish advertisements in the newspaper, magazine and
periodicals on behalf of his clients. The defendant had approached the
plaintiff for publication of his advertisement in the newspapers and
magazines of the plaintiffs and accordingly it was agreed between the
plaintiff and the defendant that the defendant will release orders on behalf
of his client for publication of advertisement in the newspapers and
magazines of the plaintiffs and the defendant will make payment as per the
invoices raised by the plaintiff fortnightly on the basis of the rates agreed
between the parties. It was further agreed by the defendant that the
defendant will make payment of the invoices raised by the plaintiff after the
agreed credit period of 60 days from the last day of the month.
Pursuant to the agreement between the parties, the defendant has
caused publication of advertisements on behalf of his client in the plaintiff's
publication from the year 2011 onwards but in the present suit, the claim of
the plaintiff against the defendant relates to from March, 2019 onwards. As
per the advertisement released by the defendant on behalf of his clients in
favour of the plaintiff, the plaintiff has published the advertisement and had
raised invoices between 15.03.2019 to 30.06.2019 amounting to Rs.
2,17,27,224/-. The defendant has placed 48 release orders with the
schedule of publication of each advertisement as indicated in the release
orders against which, the plaintiff has raised altogether 398 invoices.
Even after receipt of the invoices raised by the plaintiff, the defendant
has never controverted the claim raised by the plaintiff and on contrary, the
defendant has admitted its liability and time and again the defendant has
sought time from the plaintiff to clear its dues.
Inspite of the several requests made by the plaintiff and inspite of the
admission made by the defendant, the defendant failed to pay the principal
amount of Rs. 2,17,27,224/- along with interest @ 12% per annum total
amounting to Rs. 2,69,82,745/- and accordingly the plaintiff has filed the
instant suit.
As the suit proceeded against the defendant as 'undefended suit' and
accordingly, the plaintiff has adduced two witnesses on his behalf to prove
his claim i.e. witness no. 1 namely Mr. Indrajit Samaddar and witness no. 2
namely Mr. Rathindra Nath Banerjee. During the examination of the
witnesses, the plaintiff has altogether exhibited 11 documents which are as
follows :-
Exhibit - '1' Collectively : Release orders sent by the defendant to
the plaintiff for publication of advertisement.
Exhibit - '2' Collectively : Schedule of release orders which the
plaintiff has published in their respective papers i.e. 'Anandabazar Patrika'
and 'The Telegraph'.
Exhibit - '3' Collectively : Ledger of the defendant which are
maintained in the book of accounts of the plaintiff's SAP (System,
Applications and Production in data processing).
Exhibit - '4' Collectively : Copies of e-mails which have the
instructions sent by the plaintiff to the defendant.-
Exhibit - '5' Collectively : An internal data of ABP Private Limited
which is electronic form sent by the plaintiff to the defendant Company.
Exhibit - '6' Collectively : Schedule of invoices raised by the plaintiff
against the defendant for publishing their advertisement in the magazine
and the newspaper.
Exhibit - '7' Collectively : Letter dt. 01.07.2019 issued by the
plaintiff to the defendant to clear the overdue outstanding which was
prepared by the witness and signed by Mr. Pankaj Paharia who was the
Reporting Manager. Another letter dt. 07.08.2019 being the reminder issued
by the plaintiff to the defendant to clear the overdue amount of Rs.
2,17,27,224/-.
Exhibit - '8' Collectively : On 12.08.2019, the plaintiff sent an email
to the defendant to clear the overdue amount of Rs. 2,17,27,224/- and on
the same date, the defendant Company had replied to the said email by
confirming the said amount and assured that the defendant will clear the
overdue amount and prayed for same time.
Exhibit - '9' Collectively : Copy of the e-mails sent to the defendant
by the plaintiff calling upon the defendant for payment of the overdue
amount.
Exhibit - '10' Collectively : A legal notice issued by the plaintiff to
the defendant along with the postal receipts dt. 21.10.2020.
The plaintiff has filed this case for recovery of an amount of Rs.
2,17,27,224/- along with interest @ 12% per annum from 15.03.2019 to
30.06.2019. The documents exhibited by the plaintiff established that the
defendant has sent /released advertisements on behalf of his clients in
favour of the plaintiff for publication of the same in newspapers and
magazines of the plaintiff. It is also proves that on receipt of the release
orders issued by the defendant, the plaintiffs have published the said
advertisement either in the newspaper or in the magazines. After publication
of the advertisements, the plaintiff claimed invoices in favour of the
defendant but inspite of receipt of the invoices/bills, the defendant has not
paid the amount as raised by the plaintiff. In Exhibit 8, the defendant has
admitted the balance outstanding by an email dt. 12.08.2019. In Exhibit - 8
i.e. email dt. 27.09.2019, defendant has further confirmed that he is in talk
with his banker for preparing the plan to clear the outstanding dues. Exhibit
- '9' i.e. email dt. 20.01.2020, the defendant has requested the plaintiff to
restart business on cash and carrying business and in reply, the plaintiff
has informed the defendant that the plaintiff is ready to carry new
advertisement only on 100% advance payment. The documents brought by
the plaintiff which were exhibited proved that the defendant had admitted
the amount claimed by the plaintiff.
As the defendant has released the advertisement in favour of the
plaintiff for publication of the same either in the newspaper or in the
magazines of the plaintiff and the plaintiff has advertised the same and
raised the bill but the defendant has not paid the amounts to the plaintiff.
In view of the above, this Court is of the view that the plaintiff has
proved his case and accordingly the plaintiff is entitled to get the decree as
prayed for.
The plaintiff may get a decree for an amount of Rs. 2,17,27,224/-
against the defendants and the defendant is directed to pay the said
amount. The plaintiff is also entitled to get interest @12% per annum from
30.06.2019 till the realisation of the said amount.
CS 129 of 2021 is accordingly disposed of. Decree be drawn
accordingly.
(Krishna Rao, J.)
