Calcutta High Court
Skipper Limited vs Sri Raja Kalidas Bardhan Roy & Anr on 4 April, 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
(Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction)
COMMERCIAL DIVISION
Present:
The Hon'ble Justice Krishna Rao
CS-COM 626 of 2024
(Old No. CS 195 of 2018)
Skipper Limited
Versus
Sri Raja Kalidas Bardhan Roy & Anr.
Mr. Satadeep Bhattacharyya
Mr. Uttam Sharma
... For the plaintiff.
Hearing Concluded On : 20.03.2024
Judgment on : 04.04.2024
Krishna Rao, J.:
1. The present suit is filed by the plaintiff for a decree for a sum Rs.
28,30,011/- along with interim interest and interest upon judgment at
the rate of 18% per annum.
2. The plaintiff is engaged in the business of manufacturing and supply of
various kinds of steel and PVC materials.
3. The defendant No.1 is engaged in the business of organizing events and
event management under the name and style "Konnect" as the sole
proprietorship and the defendant No.2 is an employee of defendant
No.1.
4. It is found from the records that the Writ of Summons was not served
upon the defendants either by way of bailiff service or through postal
service and accordingly the plaintiff has taken recourse of substituted
service by way of publication in the daily Bengali Newspaper and
English Newspaper and the publication was made.
5. As per the report of the Deputy Registrar (Ct.&J.), dated 14th December,
2022, it was found that even after the publication of notice, the
defendants have not entered appearance and by an order dated 1st
August, 2023, this Court had directed the matter to be treated as an
"Undefended Suit".
6. The plaintiff and the defendant No.1 entered into an agreement dated
19th January, 2015, through which the plaintiff had engaged the
defendant no.1 as an Event Manager for "Coupon Redemption
Programme" and some of the relevant terms of the agreement are as
follows:
(i) The defendant no.1 has to organize events in
14 locations in the State of West Bengal, 6
locations in the State of Jharkhand, 2
locations in Guahati and 6 locations in the
state of Orissa on various dates and times on
the basis of a list which was submitted to the
defendant no.1 by the plaintiff.
(ii) The period of contract was one year and the
terms thereof was to be reviewed after every
six months.
(iii) The defendant no.1 was to collect data from
the loyal and general influencers as per
prescribed date provided to him and organize
the 'Coupon Redemption Scheme' and Plumber
Meet.
(iv) The representative of the defendant was to be
physically present at the time of events.
(v) The defendant no.1 was to collect coupons
from the influencers and redeem the same at
the rate of Rs.20 per coupons.
(vi) The defendant no.1 was to submit
reconciliation statement regarding the details
of coupons collected and money reimbursed
against the coupons on a weekly basis.
(vii) The defendant no.1 was to be paid monthly
remuneration of Rs. 1,11,916/-.
7. At the time of execution of the said agreement, the plaintiff had made a
payment of Rs. 1,32,247/- to the defendant for the following work to be
done:
a) Five canopies, Size 8 Ft. x 8 Ft. along with
Flex Print.
b) Five Webcam (Logitech);
c) 5000 Loyalty Cards with lamination.
8. Thereafter, a sum of Rs. 11,500/- was again paid to the defendant No.1
by the plaintiff for sending 50,000 messages on behalf of the plaintiff to
the influencers and also a sum of Rs. 4 lakhs was deposited with the
defendant as security which is to be refunded on termination of the
contract.
9. The terms of the agreement dated 19th January, 2015 were revised by a
letter dated 1st June, 2015, as issued by the plaintiff to the defendant
no.1. The relevant terms which were amended or added or revised by
way of amendment to the agreement are as follows:
(i) Defendant no.1 and its representatives should
ensure that they are carrying enough bearer
cheques of S.B.I. (State Bank of India) as this
would be the preferred and only mode of
payment to the influencers coming in for
redemption.
(ii) Defendant no.1 and its representatives should
ensure that they also carry enough cash for
the activity, as any amount below Rs.500
should be distributed in cash.
(iii) No post-dated cheques should be issued to
anybody in any venue.
(iv) The defendant no.1 will be paid approximately
Rs.4,000/- per month per venue towards fees.
(v) Failure to follow any points mentioned in the
scope of services can result in termination of
contract and/or compensation for any loss to
the company/brand.
10. The plaintiff that they have also deposited a sum of Rs.7,00,000/- as
security which was supposed to be refunded upon termination of the
revised contract dated 1st June, 2015.
11. The defendant no.1 pursuant to the revised contract, have organized a
number of events between May, 2015 to October, 2015 and in course of
such events, the defendant no.1 is alleged to have paid a total sum of
Rs.1,36,50,560/- to the influencers as against the coupon
reimbursement.
12. According to the terms of the contract the defendant no.1 was required
to submit reconcile statement and upon submission of the same, the
plaintiff would reimburse the defendant no.1 and in this regard, till
date, a total sum of Rs. 1,36,50,560/- was paid by the plaintiff to the
defendant.
13. By way of a letter dated 11th August, 2015, the defendant no.1 informed
the plaintiff that the defendant no. 2 has been authorized by him to
issue cheques on his behalf to the influencers as against the coupon
reimbursement.
14. Sometimes in the month of September, 2015, the plaintiff had started
receiving large number of complaints from influencers as to the
cheques issued by the defendants amounting to Rs. 20,42,380/-, as
against the coupon reimbursement being dishonoured upon
presentation. This was a shock to the plaintiff as the defendants had
already received payments from the plaintiff upon reconciliation of their
accounts.
15. The plaintiff in order to safeguard and protect its goodwill and
reputation made payment of a sum of Rs. 20,42,380/- to the
influencers.
16. The plaintiff, by a letter dated 16th December, 2015, called upon the
defendant no.1 to make payment of such sums of money which is due
and payable to the plaintiff on account of dishonoured cheques issued
to the influencers.
17. Even after receipt of the letter from the plaintiff, the defendant no.1 had
failed to make any payment. The plaintiff by a letter dated 31st
December, 2015 as well as 8th January, 2016, have lodged police
complaints against the defendants in view of the illegalities committed
by the defendants. The complaints were lodged before the officer-in-
charge, Shakespeare Sarani Police Station as well as the Deputy
Commissioner of Police, South Division, having his office at Park
Street, Kolkata.
18. The plaintiff in order to prove its case has adduced evidence and also
examined one witness name Mr. Shyam Sundar Mantri, who is the
Manager, Legal of the plaintiff company.
19. The plaintiff has exhibited total number of 14 (Fourteen) Documents
being "Exhibit A - to Exhibit L/1".
Exhibit - A: Board Resolution dated 6th July, 2021, through which
the plaintiff's witness was authorized to depose before the Court.
Exhibit - B: A copy of a letter dated 19th January, 2015,
recording an agreement between the plaintiff and the defendant
no.1 issued by the plaintiff upon the defendant No.1.
Exhibit - C: Original letter dated 1st June, 2015, recording
revision of contract issued by the plaintiff upon the defendant
No.1.
Exhibit - D and Exhibit - D/1: Certified and true copy of the
Ledger Statement maintained by the plaintiff of the defendant.
Exhibit - E: Schedule showing the details of the number of events
organised by the defendant no.1 between May, 2015 to October,
2015 on behalf of the plaintiff.
Exhibit - F: Original letter dated 11th August, 2015, issued by the
defendant No.1 upon the plaintiff.
Exhibit - G: Original cheques along with few dishonoured memos
and original Money Receipts.
Exhibit - H: A copy of the schedule containing particulars of
dishonoured cheques as issued by the defendants in favour of the
influencers.
Exhibit - I: A copy of the schedule showing particulars of
payments as made by the plaintiff in favour of the influencers.
Exhibit - J: A copy of a letter dated 16th December, 2015 issued
by the plaintiff upon the defendant no.1 alongwith the original
postal receipt dated 16th December, 2015 are exhibited collectively.
Exhibit - K and Exhibit K/1: Original letter dated 31st December,
2015 issued by the plaintiff to the Officer-in-Charge, Shakespeare
Sarani Police, Shakeaspear Sarani and K/1 is the stamp of the
receipt of the Office-in-Charge.
Exhibit - L and Exhibit L/1: Original letter dated 8th January,
2016, issued by the plaintiff to the Deputy Commissioner of Police
South Division and Exhibit L/1 is stamp of the receipt of the
Deputy Commissioner.
20. Exhibit - B and C which are the letters dated 19th January, 2015 and
1st June, 2015, which proves that there has been one agreement and
one revised agreement between the plaintiff company and the defendant
No.1 under which the defendant No.1 was appointed by the plaintiff to
organize events in several states in India.
Exhibit - D is a copy of a Ledger Statement maintained by the
plaintiff wherein details of several payments made by the plaintiff to the
defendant no.1 from time to time in respect of the work done by the
defendant no.1 on behalf of the plaintiff, which proves that the plaintiff
had duly fulfilled its obligations regarding the payment for the work
done.
Exhibit - E is the details of the events organized by the defendant
no.1 in between May, 2015 to October, 2015 on behalf of the plaintiff
on different places.
Exhibit - F is a letter issued by the defendant no.1 to the plaintiff,
which proves that the defendant No.1 had authorized the defendant
No.2 to make payments to Saathis or influencers coming with coupons
during the events for redemption activities and also to receive payment
in form of Cheques/RTGS for Coupon Reimbursement which proves
involvement of the defendant no. 2.
Exhibit - G are the cheques along with cheque return memos and
money receipts issued by the defendants to the influencers which
proves that the cheques issued by the defendants to the influencers
have been dishonoured and the defendants have not paid the amounts.
Exhibit - I is the details of payment made by the plaintiff which
amounts to a sum of Rs. 20,42,380/-, to protect and safeguard its
goodwill in the market amongst the influencers after the dishonour of
cheques which were issued by the defendants.
Exhibit - J is a copy of a letter dated 16th December, 2015, issued
by the plaintiff to the defendant no. 1 informing about dishonour of
cheques from which the plaintiff had to receive an amount of Rs.
24,95,173/- after making all adjustments and also terminated the
contract.
Exhibit - K, K/1, L and L/1 are copies of letters dated 31st
December, 2015 and 8th January, 2016, which were sent to the Officer-
in-Charge, Shakespeare Sarani Police Station and to the Deputy
Commissioner of Police, South Division, Park Street, Kolkata which
were duly received by both the authorities, which proves that steps
were taken by the plaintiff against the illegal act committed by the
defendants.
21. Considered the plaint, evidence of the plaintiff and the documents
which were exhibited during the evidence of P.W.1. This court finds
that the plaintiff has proved its case. The defendants have received total
payments from the plaintiff and have issued cheques to the influencers
but subsequently the cheques issued by the defendants were
dishonoured and the defendants have neither paid the said amount to
the influencers nor to the plaintiff as the plaintiff to save its good will
made the payments to the influencers after dishonoured of cheques
issued by the defendants.
22. The plaintiff proves that apart from Rs. 20,42,380/-, the plaintiff is also
entitled to get refund of security amount of Rs. 11,00,000/- and
Rs.50,000/- towards advance retainership, Rs. 1,164/- being refund of
bank charges paid for dishonour of cheques and Rs. 5,600/- being the
cost of 4 web cameras. Out of the total amount of Rs. 31,99,144/-, the
defendant has paid only Rs.7,99,827/-.
23. Considering the above facts and circumstances of the case, this Court
finds that the plaintiff is entitled to get an amount of Rs. 23,99,317/-
along with interest at the rate of 10% per annum from the date of filing
of the suit till the realisation of the total amount.
The defendants are directed to pay jointly and severally an amount
of Rs. 23,99,317/- along with interest at the rate of 10% per annum
from the date of filing of the case till realisation of the total amount to
the plaintiff.
24. CS-COM 626 of 2024 (Old C.S. No. 195 of 2018) is thus disposed of.
Decree to be drawn accordingly.
(Krishna Rao, J.)
