Imperial Tubes Pvt. Ltd vs Ramesh Co
2023 Latest Caselaw 734 Cal/2

OD-1

                        IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
                            Civil Appellate Jurisdiction
                                  ORIGINAL SIDE

                                   APD/6/2021
                                       with
                                   CS/254/2019

                            IMPERIAL TUBES PVT. LTD.
                                    VERSUS
                                  RAMESH CO.

BEFORE:
The Hon'ble JUSTICE SOUMEN SEN

AND The Hon'ble JUSTICE UDAY KUMAR Date : 21st March, 2023.

The Court : None appears on behalf of the parties.

Even on the earlier occasion, the parties were not represented. The matter

was adjourned on 29th March, 2023 on the prayer of the learned counsel

representing the appellant that the issue with regard to the jurisdiction of the

Master to grant leave under Section 12A of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015 and

the power of the Master to allow amendment of the plaint are the issues raised in

the execution proceedings and the said application is pending. Although the

parties were not represented, we directed the office to inform us about the outcome

of the said proceedings.

Thereafter, on 31st January, 2023, we have recorded that during the

pendency of the appeal, the application for recalling the orders passed by the

learned Master and the other connected applications were dismissed by Justice

Moushumi Bhattacharya on 7th April, 2022. It appears that the ground nos.(V),

(VI), (XLIV) to (LIX) are in connection with the issues that have been decided by the

learned Single Judge on 7th April, 2022. There is no independent appeal from the

said judgment.

We have not been informed as to whether any appeal is pending arising out

of the judgment dated 7th April, 2022. Accordingly, we proceed on the basis that

the said order has attained finality.

The plaintiff filed an application under Chapter XIIIA of the Original Side

Rules for a summary decree for a sum of Rs.5,79,58,608/-. The said application

was filed based on confirmation of accounts and admission. The principal defence

to the claim was three letters in which the defendant alleged to have raised

disputes with regard to the quality of goods supplied. Justice Debangsu Basak

had relied upon three acknowledgement of accounts dated 1st April, 2016, 1st April,

2017 and 1st April, 2018 respectively in allowing the said application for judgment

upon admission. The said accounts were all signed by the parties. The signatures

of the parties are not in dispute. The letters under reference, however, do not

specify the quantity of the inferior goods alleged to have been supplied. The letter

in support of the alleged inferior quality dated 2nd March, 2017 was after

acknowledgment of the goods and confirmation dated 1st April, 2016. In fact, the

defendant made various part payments subsequent to 2nd March, 2017 in

acknowledgement of acceptance. The defendant was unable to furnish the list of

alleged inferior goods supplied and the invoices under which such goods were

supplied. The allegations are bald and invented with a view to deny the legitimate

claim of the plaintiff. The appellant has dealt with the goods inconsistent with the

right of the plaintiff as owner thereof and after having consumed the goods has

raised such complaints of inferior quality. There is a clear acceptance of the goods

within the meaning of Section 42 of the Sale of Goods Act, 1930.

Under such circumstances, we do not find any reason to interfere with the

judgment passed by the learned Single Judge.

The appeal stands dismissed.

However, there shall be no order as to costs.

The judgment dated 7th April, 2022 passed by Justice Moushumi

Bhattacharya is kept with record.

[SOUMEN SEN, J.]

[UDAY KUMAR, J.]

s.pal