Reliance Industries Ltd. vs Maruti Syntex (India) Ltd.
2001 Latest Caselaw 1793 Del

JUDGMENT

A.K. Sikri, J.

1. The plaintiff has filed this suit for recovery of Rs.1,09,01,632/- with pendente lite and future interest. It is a case of the plaintiff that it is engaged in the business of manufacturing and marketing Polyester Partially Oriented Yarn (hereinafter referred to as the `POY'). The defendant company which is manufacturing concern, uses POY as raw material for its production activities. On the basis of orders placed by the defendant to the plaintiff for the purchase of various quantities of POY from time to time, the material was delivered to the defendant on credit basis and in lieu thereto sales hundis were drawn on the defendant and the defendant was liable to make payment to the plaintiff within 60 days from the date of S.No.1323/98:

dispatch of the consignment.

2. It is further stated in the plaint that it was the practice of the defendant company to place purchase orders with the plaintiff company for various quantities of POY sought to be purchased. The plaintiff company in turn, raised invoices in accordance with the said purchase orders and supplied to the defendant company, POY in terms of the said invoices. The plaintiff has been duly supplying the goods and the defendant has been receiving the same without any objection or complaint as is evident from the acknowledged lorry receipts wherein the defendant has acknowledged the receipt of the goods/POY in terms of the invoices raised.

3. Further it is stated that the defendant in the year 1994 started making defaults in the payment of the purchase price of the said POY to the plaintiff. As a result of these defaults the outstanding due and payable by the defendant accumulated. The defendant has duly acknowledged their liability towards the plaintiff in letter of the defendant dated 7.9.1994 addressed to the plaintiff herein and vide the minutes of the meeting between the parties on 6.9.1994 (The defendant company being represented in the said meeting by its Managing Director).

4. It is further stated that the defendant company made several requests to the plaintiff to continue with the supply of POY and assured the plaintiff that all the outstandings would be cleared very soon. The plaintiff accepting the plea/assurances of the defendant supplied the defendant with various quantities of POY in terms of various invoices from 3rd of June,1995 onwards till 28.9.1995 (being the date of the last invoice raised and goods supplied in terms thereof). The defendant company has duly acknowledged the receipt of POY supplied in terms of the aforesaid invoices and the same is evident from the acknowledged lorry receipts.

5. Thereafter the defendant issued following two cheques as part payment of the outstanding dues:

            S.No.   Cheque No.      Date            Amount (Rs.) 
        1.      082969  22.01.98        3,18,122.00
        2.      290337  19.01.98        1,00,000.00   
                     

6. These cheques were, however, dishonoured on presentation on the ground that there were no sufficient funds in the account of the defendant. When the cheques were returned. After the dishonouring of the said cheques, the plaintiff sent legal notice dated 5.2.1998 under the provisions of Negotiable Instrument Act calling upon the defendant to clear the outstanding dues. However, no payment was made and in these circumstances the plaintiff initiated criminal proceedings against the defendant under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instrument Act. It is further stated that the defendant is jointly, severally liable to pay a sum of Rs.1,09,01,632/- which liability they have acknowledged from time to time. They are also liable to pay interest @ 24% P.A.

7. The defendant was duly served with the summons in this suit. However, nobody appeared on behalf of the defendant in spite of service and by orders dated 25.8.1998 the defendant was proceeded ex-parte. Thereafter, by order dated 2.12.1998 the plaintiff was permitted to lead evidence by means of affidavit. The plaintiff initially filed affidavit of Shri Surinder Singh, General Manager, Marketing and also filed certain documents. When the case came up on 20.7.1999 the plaintiff sought permission to file further documents which was allowed subject to payment of Rs.500/- as cost to be deposited with Delhi Legal Services Authority. Thereafter some time was taken by the plaintiff to file original Power of Attorney along with affidavit and the additional affidavit of Shri Surinder Singh exhibiting Power of Attorney was filed on 7.11.2001 along with statement of account.

8. In the affidavit dated 2.12.1998 the witness has proved Power of Attorney given by the plaintiff company to Shri Surinder Singh, General Manager, Marketing as per which he is authorised attorney of the plaintiff company, competent to file the present suit and depose about the matter. He has also in this affidavit affirmed various averments made in the plaint and recorded above. Various delivery invoices by which the goods were supplied to the defendant and the hundies drawn on the defendant are proved as Ex.PW-1/2 to PW1/19. It is further stated that the defendant company never raised any objection regarding quality and quantity supplied by the plaintiff company to the defendant company. The consignment notes and transport receipts evidencing the receipt of goods are proved as Ex.PW1/28 to PW1/36. The two cheques, particulars of which are given above, given by the defendant as well as the documents evidencing the said cheques having been dishonoured are Ex.PW1/20 to PW1/23. Legal notice dated 16.3.1998 is proved as Ex.PW1/24, registered postal receipts as PW1/25 to PW1/26, A/D card as PW1/27 showing that legal notice was received by Shri V.K.Mehta, Managing Director of the defendant company. By the additional affidavit dated 7.11.2001 the plaintiff has proved statement of account as Ex.PW.1/38 which shows the debit entries regarding goods supplied and the interest charged thereon making a total of Rs.1,09,01,632/- as on 31/3/98.

9. From the aforesaid documents on record and unrebutted testimony the plaintiff has proved its case. As per hundies the interest chargeable was 24% which is the interest charged by the plaintiff as reflected in the statement of account. As per the delivery invoice interest @ 24% p.a. was chargeable if the payment is not made by due date. The interest charged in the statement of account as per that rate is, therefore in accordance with the agreement between the parties.

10. The suit in the sum of Rs.1,09,01,632/- is accordingly decreed with costs. The plaintiff shall also be entitled to the pendente lite and future interest. This interest would, however, be at the rate of 11% p.a. keeping in view the interest rates which are prevailing now. Decree sheet be drawn accordingly.