Mec Tubes Pvt. Ltd. vs Indo Engineering Works And Anr.
2001 Latest Caselaw 1017 Del

JUDGMENT

V.S. Aggarwal, J.

1. Mec Tubes Pvt. Ltd., hereinafter described as the plaintiff has preferred the present suit against the defendants for recovery of Rs.11,73,370/- besides interest.

2. The relevant facts are that the plaintiff is a dealer of MS Blocks/GI pipes. Defendant No. 2 is the sole proprietor of defendant No. 1. He has been dealing with the plaintiff since 1993. Orders were being placed from time to time with the plaintiff for supply of material. The plaintiff supplied the goods as per orders placed by the defendants from Calcutta, Ghaziabad and Delhi. As per convenience supplies were made by the plaintiff. The plaintiff opened a running and current account in the name of defendant No. 1 in its account books maintained in the usual course of business. Whatever goods were supplied to the defendants the price was debited in the account of defendant No. 1 and similarly whenever payments were received from defendants from time to time towards price of the goods the same were credited in the said account. The defendants were registered with the Central Sales TGGax and supplied From C towards the supply of the goods and as such acknowledge the supply of the goods.

3. To discharge their liability of making the payment of the supply of the goods, the defendants issued four cheques mentioned below:-

 a)      Cheque No. 731697 dt 15.3.95 for 
        Rs.2,27,802.12 

b)      Cheque No. 731700 dt. 31.3.95 for
        Rs.1,00,000.00

c)      Cheque No. 504351 dt 31.3.95 for 
        Rs.1,00,000.00

d)       Cheque No. 504352 dt. 31.3.95 for 
         Rs.1,00,000.00

 

All these cheques amounted to Rs. 5,53,639.13.

 

4. At the time of delivery of the four cheques, defendants had asured the plaintiff that the same would be encashed but they were all dishounoured. It is claimed that as per the statement of account there is a debit balance of Rs. 5,56,610.88. Interest is being claimed at the rate of 24% per annum from the date of the billing i.e. 26th June, 1998, as per the agreement. Hence the present suit.

5. Summons had been issued to the defendants and they have put in appearance through the counsel. But on 25th May, 2000 they were proceeded ex parte. Affidavit had been filed in support of the evidence.

6. Perusal of the bills, copies of which are PW 1/2 to PW 1/4 clearly show that the goods as such were supplied to the defendants. This fact gets further corroboration from the cheques PW 1/5, PW 1/6, PW 1/8 and PW 1/10 purported to have been issued by the defendants. All of them had been dishonoured. There is no explanation as to why the cheques were issued. Therefore, the plaintiff's claim that in fact goods were supplied for which the payment claimed is due, cannot be ignored. It must be held that amount claimed by the plaintiff of Rs. 5,56,610.88 is due.

7. As regards the rate of interest, the same is being claimed at the rate of 24% per annum. On of the face of it the same is excessive. Plaintiffs thus would be entitled to only recover interest at the rate of 12% per annum.

8. For these reasons the suit of the plaintiff is decreed for Rs. 5,56,610.888 as the principal amount for supply of goods and Rs.3,08,379.56 i.e. interest at the rate of 12% per annum from the date of the bills up to 26th June, 1998, with future interest at the same rate on the decretal amount form the date of the filing of the suit till realisation.