Karnataka High Court
M/S Rewards 360 Services Pvt Ltd vs M/S Gms Express Pvt Ltd on 7 February, 2024
Author: H.T. Narendra Prasad
Bench: H.T. Narendra Prasad
-1-
NC: 2024:KHC:5247
RFA No. 440 of 2016
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 7TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD
REGULAR FIRST APPEAL NO. 440 OF 2016 (MON)
BETWEEN:
M/S REWARDS 360 SERVICES PVT LTD
A COMPANY REGISTERED UNDER
THE COMPANIES ACT,1956 AND
HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE
AT NO.2/2,LAVELLE ROAD
BANGALORE-560 001
AND REPRESENTED HEREIN BY ITS
AUTHORISED SIGNATORY
MR TENGZIN KHANGSAR
AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS
S/O MR TSULTIM KHANGSAR
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI. KASHYAP N NAIK., ADVOCATE)
AND:
Digitally signed by M/S GMS EXPRESS PVT LTD
HEMALATHA A
Location: High
A COMPANY REGISTERED UNDER THE
Court of Karnataka COMPANIES ACT,1956 AND
HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE
AT NO.189/1,3RD MAIN,6TH CROSS
CHAMARAJPET, BANGALORE-560 018.
AND REPRESENTED HEREIN BY ITS
G.M(FINANCE) MR HUBERT PINTO
MAJOR.
...RESPONDENT
(BY SRI. P K VENKATESH PRASAD., ADVOCATE [ABSENT])
THIS RFA IS FILED UNDER SECTON 96 R/W ORDER 41
RULE 1 OF CPC., AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE
-2-
NC: 2024:KHC:5247
RFA No. 440 of 2016
DATED 04.12.2015 PASSED IN O.S NO.1221/2014 ON THE FILE
OF THE XX ADDL. CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE,
BENGALURU, DECREEING THE SUIT FOR RECOVERY OF
MONEY.
THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR HEARING, THIS DAY, THE
COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT
This appeal is filed by the defendant under Section 96
r/w. Order 41 Rule 1 of CPC, challenging the judgment and
decree dated 04.12.2015 passed by the XX Additional City
Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru in O.S.No.1221/2014,
whereby the suit filed by the plaintiff was allowed.
2. For the sake of convenience, the parties are
referred to as per their ranking before the trial court.
3. The brief facts of the case are that the plaintiff is a
Company registered under the Companies Act carrying on
business of courier and extending logistic support with
regard to travel and transportation. There was an
agreement between the plaintiff and the defendant dated
15.02.2013 for providing courier services. The defendant
approached the plaintiff company for delivering
consignments to various places of their destination across
NC: 2024:KHC:5247
India. After dispatching delivery consignment entrusted by
the defendant to various destinations and informing the
defendant's responsibility of producing any other
document required to be produced before the Excise and
Taxation Department at the check-post whenever needed.
In the month of April 2013, defendant availed the services
of the plaintiff company for transportation of certain
consignments belonging to them and deliver the same to
various places as mentioned in the waybill. For that
service, plaintiff company claimed an amount of
Rs.42,560/-. For the services provided by the plaintiff
company to the defendant for February 2013, the plaintiff
company raised an invoice on 28.02.2013 for an amount
of Rs.2,85,109/-. Out of that amount, the defendant paid
only Rs.1,48,026/- and the balance of Rs.1,79,643/- with
interest has not been paid. Hence, plaintiff filed a suit for
recovery of money.
4. On service of summons, defendant appeared
through counsel and filed the written statement denying
NC: 2024:KHC:5247
the claim of the plaintiff. It is contended that it is not liable
to pay Rs.1,79,643/- to the plaintiff and also denied that
plaintiff company has provided any service against the
invoice raised during the months of February and April
2013. Hence, he sought for dismissal of the suit.
5. On the basis of the pleadings of the parties, the
trial court framed the following issues and additional issue:
(1) Whether the plaintiff company proves that it has
provided services to the defendant under the
agreement dated 15.02.2013 and raised
invoices for having delivered the consignments
to the defendant?
(2) Whether the defendant proves that the plaintiff
company had not provided any services against
the said invoices raised by them during the
months of February and April 2013 under the
said agreement?
(3) Whether the plaintiff company is entitled for the
relief claimed in the suit?
(4) What order or decree?
6. To prove the case, plaintiff examined the General
manager (Finance) of the plaintiff company as PW1 and
NC: 2024:KHC:5247
marked documents as Exs.P1 to P8. No evidence has been
adduced on the defendant's side.
7. The trial court, on appreciation of the oral and
documentary evidence, answered issue Nos. 1 and 3 in the
negative and issue No.2 in the affirmative and decreed the
suit. Being aggrieved by the judgment and decree, the
defendant is before this Court.
8. The learned counsel appearing for the appellant
/defendant contended that the trial court has not given
opportunity to the defendant to defend his case.
Defendant has not been given the opportunity to cross-
examine the plaintiff and the defendant was also not
examined. Hence, he submits that, if this Court gives one
more opportunity, the defendant will establish his case.
9. None appears for the respondent/plaintiff.
10. It is not in dispute that there was an agreement
between the plaintiff and the defendant dated 15.02.2013.
The claim of the plaintiff is that the defendant is due a
NC: 2024:KHC:5247
sum of Rs.1,79,643/-. Therefore, plaintiff filed a suit for
recovery of money. The defendant denied the same
stating that there is no due as claimed by the plaintiff.
Even though the defendant filed the written statement,
has not examined any witness and also not cross-
examined the plaintiff. Under these circumstances, to give
one more opportunity to the defendant, I am of the
opinion that the matter requires to be remitted back to the
trial court.
11. In view of the above, I pass the following order:
(i) The appeal is allowed.
(ii) The judgment and decree dated 04.12.2015
passed by the XX Additional City Civil & Sessions Judge,
Bangalore in O.S.No.1221/2014 is set aside.
(iii) The matter is remitted back to the trial court with
a direction to reconsider the matter afresh, after giving
opportunity to both the parties to adduce additional
evidence and produce additional documents.
NC: 2024:KHC:5247
(iv) The parties are directed to appear before the trial
court, on 11.03.2024, without any further notice.
(v) The trial court is directed to dispose of the suit as
expeditiously as possible.
Sd/-
JUDGE
CM
