Delhi High Court
P P Jewellers Pvt Ltd vs Modern New Kapoor Jewellers Pvt ... on 4 February, 2014
Author: G. S. Sistani
$~ 12
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ CS(OS) 1009/2012
% Order dated 04.02.2014
P P JEWELLERS PVT LTD ..... Plaintiff
Through: Mr.Karan Jain, Advocate
versus
MODERN NEW KAPOOR JEWELLERS PVT LTD..... Defendant
Through: Mr.Manish Srivastava, Advocate
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.S.SISTANI
G.S.SISTANI, J (ORAL)
1.
Plaintiff has filed the present suit under the provisions of Order 37 CPC
for recovery of Rs.81.72 lacs with pendente lite and future interest. As
per the plaint, the business transaction between the plaintiff and the
defendant took place against plaintiff's two invoices being No.02585
dated 1.7.2010 and the invoice no.02879 dated 14.7.2010. The invoices
were signed by the director of the defendant company i.e. Sita Ram
Kapoor in acknowledgment of purchasing new ornaments, which were
duly described in the invoices which reads as under:
Invoice Description Amount
02585 New Ornaments - purity 1,08,59,954/-
22Cts. + Vat @ 1%
Dated 1,08,600
01.07.2010 Gross Weight (Gms) -
5736.460 Total
Net Weight (Gms)-5736.460 1,09,68,554/-
33,91,960/-
02879 New Ornaments - purity
Dated 18Cts.
14.07.2010 Gross Weight (Gms) -
1169.040
Net Weight (Gms)-1169.040
36,93,258/-
Diamonds (Cts.) - 154.76
New Ornaments - Purity 14 + Vat @ 1%
Cts. 70,853/-
Gross Weight (Gms) - Total
1025.560 71,56,071/-
Net Weight (Gms) -
1025.560
Diamonds (Cts.) -215.690
2. Further as per the plaint the defendant made payments against the part
invoices by sending remittance through its bank and also by issuing
account payee cheques in favour of the plaintiff. The cheques were
handed over which were duly encashed, however, further unpaid amount
was given through cheque bearing No.981943 dated 29.6.2011 drawn on
Barclays Bank, Nehru Place, New Delhi, for the sum of Rs.72.0 lacs.
which was handed over to the plaintiff. Upon presentation the aforesaid
cheque was returned with the remarks 'Exceeds arrangement'.
3. It is pointed out that the original cheque has been filed under the
proceedings of Negotiable Instruments Act, however, a certified copy of
the cheque has been placed on record. The defendant was served with the
summons in the prescribed form; address for service was filed, however,
there is no application for leave to defend on record.
4. It may however, be noticed that on making a statement by counsel for the
defendant on 21.10.2013 that an application for leave to defend has been
filed by diary no.89066 dated 31.5.2013, the defendant was directed to
check up with the Registry and place the application on record after
removing the defects. As per the report of the Registry no such
application has been filed.
5. In the absence of any application for leave to defend, as per Rule 3 (5) of
Order 37 CPC, the present suit is decreed. Plaintiff will be entitled to
interest @8% pendente lite and future interest at the same rate till
realization.
I.A. 6809/2012 & I.A. 1037/2013
6. In view of order passed in the suit, the applications stand disposed of.
G.S.SISTANI, J
FEBRUARY 04, 2014
ssn
