Delhi High Court
M/S Prolative Estate Pvt Ltd vs M/S Indian Group Real Estate & Ors on 5 February, 2015
$~
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ CS(OS) 1981/2012
Date of Decision: February 5, 2015
M/S PROLATIVE ESTATE PVT LTD ..... Plaintiff
Through Mr.L.M.Asthana & Mr.Siddhant
Asthana, Advs.
versus
M/S INDIAN GROUP REAL ESTATE & ORS ..... Defendants
Through None.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAYANT NATH
CS(OS) 1981/2012
JAYANT NATH, J. (ORAL)
1. Arguments have been heard in the suit. Despite service none appeared on
behalf of the defendants before this court and accordingly the defendants were
proceeded ex-parte vide Order dated 18.03.2014.
2. The defendants had issued some cheques in favour of the plaintiff but the
same were dishonoured by the bankers. Moreover proceedings under section
138 are also going on against the defendants as recorded vide Order dated
15.01.2015.
3. The present suit is filed for recovery of Rs.22,60,000/- with interest from
the Defendant. It is the contention of the plaintiff that it is a Delhi based
company incorporated under the name of M/s Prolative Estates Pvt. Ltd. and is
engaged in the business of real estate.
4. It is the contention of the plaintiff that defendant no.2 is the proprietor
and in charge of defendant no.1 firm i.e. Indian Group Real Estate also engaged
in the business of real estate at Bhopal.
5. It is the contention of the plaintiff that the plaintiff was interested in
purchasing a land of approximately 2 acres in Bhopal, on which Defendant
no.2 assured the plaintiff that he is in a position to arrange the same and
requested the plaintiff to pay advance money. Believing the word of the
defendant, it is stated that the plaintiff gave a cheque no.665447 dated
10.10.2011 for Rs.2,50,000/- and another cheque no.665449 dated 10.10.2011
for Rs.1,50,000/-. The plaintiff further contends that both the cheques were
encashed by Defendant no.2 and he collected the total amount of Rs.4 lacs from
the bank.
6. It is contended by the plaintiff that another cheque of Rs.17,00,000/-
dated 13.10.2011 was also drawn in favour of defendant no.1. It is stated that
the bank statement of the plaintiff company confirms the encashment of the
above stated cheque.
7. It is further contended by the plaintiff that the plaintiff visited Bhopal to
see the land and repeatedly requested the defendant no.2 for the same, but no
interest was shown by Defendant no.2. Thereafter it is stated that Defendant
no.2 gave false assurances to the plaintiff regarding the availability of the land
and further demanded payment of Rs.1,60,000/- which was paid to him from
his own firm account in the name of M/s Ritika Offset Printers vide cheque
no.947309 dated 22.10.2011.
8. It is also contended by the plaintiff that no land was shown or bought by
defendant no.2 on his behalf inspite of receiving a total payment of
Rs.22,60,000/- till date. The plaintiff made several demands to refund the
amount of Rs.22,60,000/- due to the plaintiff by the Defendant no.2. Defendant
has defaulted in performing the same.
9. It is the contention of the plaintiff that a a legal notice was issued to the
defendant no.2 dated 21.04.2012 and copy of the courier receipt is enclosed as
Annexure-P5 & P6. A.D. Cards have been placed on record As Annexure P7.
10. It is the contention of the plaintiff that the defendants have not made any
attempts to make the payment to the plaintiff inspite of repeated demands.
Hence the present suit was filed.
11. Sh. Ravi Dutt Sharma, Director of the Plaintiff Company has placed on
record his evidence by way of affidavit as PW1. He has stated that two
cheques were issued by the plaintiff in favour of defendant no.2 for a total sum
of Rs. 4,00,000/- on 10.10.2012. The Bank statement showing the encashment
of the cheques in favour of Defendant is placed on record as Exhibit PW-1/2.
The affidavit also states that cheque No.665445 dated 13.10.2011 drawn on
Bank of Bikaner and Jaipur, Vasant Kunj, Delhi for Rs.17 lacs was also issued
in the name of Indian Group Real Estate i.e. defendant No.1 and was handed
over to defendant No.2 in Delhi. The cheque it is averred has been duly
encashed. It is further stated that the defendant falsely assured the plaintiff
regarding availability of land and further demanded Rs. 1,60,000/- which the
plaintiff paid to him from his own firm account, M/s Ritika Offset Printers vide
cheque dated 22.10.2011. The said cheque was duly encashed by defendant no.
2. The Bank statement confirming the encashment is placed on record as Ex
PW-1/3. Since defendant no.2 was showing no interest in purchasing a plot for
the plaintiff in Bhopal, the plaintiff asked for a reimbursement of the total
amount of Rs. 22,60,000/-. It is stated that after repeated reminders and
requests made by the plaintiff, the defendants failed to make goods the payment
of the above said amount. The plaintiff thereafter issued a legal demand notice
dated 21.04.2012 to the Defendant and the same was received by the defendant.
The legal notice, postal receipts and A.D.Cards are placed on record as
Ex.PW1/4 to PW1/10.
12. The said witness PW-1 has also filed an additional affidavit where he has
pointed out that defendant No.2 issued two cheques one for Rs.12 lacs dated
17.4.2012 and another for Rs.9,80,000/- dated 1.4.2013 in discharge of its
liability to the plaintiff. The cheques it is averred were returned unpaid by the
bankers of the defendant. Copy of the cheques have been enclosed with the
affidavit alongwith the return memos.
13. In view of the above, the plaintiffs have succeeded to show that the
defendant has taken an advance of Rs.22,60,000/- from the plaintiffs and the
said amount remains unpaid. The land which was to be purchased by the
defendant for the plaintiff has also not been done.
14. The suit is decreed for the said sum of Rs.22,60,000/- alongwith interest
@9% per annum from the date of filing of the present suit till recovery of the
amount. The plaintiff is also entitled to costs.
JAYANT NATH, J.
FEBRUARY 05, 2015
n
