M/S Strategic Overseas Pvt Ltd vs M/S Ajs Builders Pvt Ltd
2014 Latest Caselaw 5214 Del

*      IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

                                          Pronounced on: 16th October, 2014

+      CS(OS) 95/2011
       M/S STRATEGIC OVERSEAS PVT LTD                 ..... Plaintiff
                     Through: Mr. Shailender Dahiya, Adv.

                          versus

       M/S AJS BUILDERS PVT LTD                            ..... Defendant
                     Through: Ex-parte

       CORAM:
       HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.P. MITTAL


G.P. Mittal, J. (Oral)

1. This suit for recovery of `23,62,787/- has been filed by the Plaintiff

against the Defendant with the allegation that the Plaintiff had taken

four plots, measuring 240 sq. yds. each in future projects of the

Defendant. The amount in respect of the four plots totalling

`18,71,515/- was paid on various dates through receipts executed by

the Defendant as mentioned in paras 3 to 5 of the plaint.

2. It is averred that since the plots were not being allotted and the

Plaintiff's Director found that there was no development at the site

where the plots were to be carved out, the Plaintiff applied to the

Defendant for refund of the amount.

3. It is the case of the Plaintiff that the Defendant asked the Plaintiff to

return of the original receipts and supply copy of PAN card, NOC

from the broker and signature verification from the bank, which were

duly supplied by the Plaintiff to the Defendant by letter dated

06.03.2009 (mark P, Q,R and S). The Plaintiff also made several

requests and personal visits but the amount paid was not refunded

despite the promise made by the Defendant.

4. The Defendant filed written statement contesting the claim of the

Plaintiff. By an order dated 28.09.2012 the learned counsel for the

Defendant was directed to place on record the authority of the person

who had purportedly signed the written statement as it was represented

before the Joint Registrar that an unauthorised person had signed the

written statement, which were later on retracted. The Defendant failed

to file the authority, rather none appeared on behalf of the Defendant

in the Court after 28.09.2012. The Defendant was, therefore, ordered

to be proceeded ex-parte.

5. In ex-parte evidence, the Plaintiff has filed the Affidavit of Mr. Tarun

Kumar Gupta, Director of the Plaintiff Ex.PW-1/A who has

corroborated the averments made in the plaint. PW-1 also proved the

documents Ex.PW-1/1 to Ex.PW-1/13.

6. Since the Defendant was ordered to be proceeded ex-parte, the

testimony of PW-1 who has fully corroborated the averments made in

the plaint has remained unchallenged and unrebutted.

7. In view of this, suit of the Plaintiff is decreed for `23,62,787/- with

pendente lite and future interest @ 6% per annum.

8. A decree sheet be drawn accordingly.

9. Pending applications also stand disposed of.

(G.P. MITTAL) JUDGE OCTOBER 16, 2014 vk