Ruprai Exports Pvt Ltd vs M/S Trade Circle & Others
2008 Latest Caselaw 1200 Del

*IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+
                  CS(OS) 1634/2006

%                              Date of decision :        31.07.2008

RUPRAI EXPORTS PVT LTD                            ......Plaintiff

                               Through: Mr Dhananjai Rana, advocate

                                 Versus


M/S TRADE CIRCLE & OTHERS                              ......Defendants .

                                           Ex parte.


CORAM :-
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW
     1. Whether reporters of Local papers may
        be allowed to see the judgment?                         YES

     2. To be referred to the reporter or not?                  NO

     3. Whether the judgment should be reported                 NO
        in the Digest?


RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW, J (ORAL)


1.     The plaintiff has instituted the present suit for recovery of Rs

58,10,913/- along with pendent lite and future interest at the rate of

15% per annum. The monies are claimed to be due for the garments

exported by the plaintiff to the defendant No.1 firm of which

defendant Nos 2 and 3 are partners.              The defendants were

proceeded ex parte vide order dated 14th March, 2007. The plaintiff

has, thereafter, led its ex parte evidence by filing the affidavit by

way of examination in chief of Shri Lakhvinder Singh Rooprai,

Director of the plaintiff and of Shri Subodh Garg, accountant of the

plaintiff.




cs(os)1634/2006                                           page no.1 of 3
 2.     PW1 Shri Lakhvinder Singh Rooprai has proved the certificate

of incorporation of the plaintiff company as PW1/2 and the

Resolution of the Board of Directors of the plaintiff company

authorizing Shri Lakhvinder Singh Rooprai to institute the suit and

sign and verify the plaint and depose before the court as Exhibit

PW1/1. The said witness has further deposed that goods were

supplied by the plaintiff to the defendant No.1 firm vide invoices

dated 20th April, 2002 to 20th February, 2003 of the total value of

GBP-80,337.57 equal to Rs.58,10,913/-. The certified copy of the

ledger of the plaintiff stated to be maintained in the normal course

of business of the plaintiff has been proved as Exhibit PW1/4. The

witness has also proved as Ex PW1/6 acknowledgement of liability

by the defendants vide letter dated 7th October, 2005 of the

defendant No.3 as partner of defendant No.1 and addressed to the

plaintiff at Delhi acknowledging liability in the sum of GBP-80,337/-.

The invoices vide which supplies were made by the plaintiff to the

defendants have been proved as Exhibit PW1/7 and the airway and

shipping bill has been proved as Exhibit PW1/8 and forms SDF and

certificate of origin issued by the Customs Authorities for the export

have been proved as Exhibit PW1/9.      PW2 Shri Subodh Garg has

deposed that he is computer literate and had been operating the

computer maintaining the accounts of the plaintiff and has fed the

entries of bills/invoices on a day-to-day basis.      The computer

generated accounts statement has been proved as Exhibit PW2/1

which also shows the amount of Rs 58,10,913/- to be due from the

defendant No.1 to the plaintiff.




cs(os)1634/2006                                        page no.2 of 3
 3.     Needless to add that the aforesaid evidence of the witnesses

of the plaintiff remains unrebutted.




4.     Though the defendants are based in / residents of London,

jurisdiction of this court has been invoked alleging that the supplies

were made by the plaintiff to the defendant from Delhi and the

orders were placed at Delhi and all negotiations took place at Delhi.

These averments also remain unrebutted. On these averments, this

court has territorial jurisdiction over subject matter of suit. Though

the invoices vide which supplies have been made are of a date more

than three years prior to the institution of the suit but the

defendants have within three years prior to the institution of the suit

vide letter Exhibit PW1/6 (supra) unequivocally admitted liability in

the suit amount by the plaintiff.      The claim in suit is thus within

time. The plaintiff has proved its case for recovery of Rs 58,10,913/-

from the defendants jointly and severally.        However, since, the

defendants have not contested the suit, the plaintiff is held entitled

to interest at 6% per annum only from the date of the institution of

the suit till realization. The plaintiff in the circumstances is held

entitled to costs limited to the court fees paid by the plaintiff. The

suit of the plaintiff is accordingly decreed in the aforesaid terms.




                                            RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW, J.

July 31, 2008. M

cs(os)1634/2006 page no.3 of 3