Madras High Court
M/S.Sri Arumuga Sugars Limited vs M/S.Integrated Service Point ... on 8 September, 2023
C.S.No.98 of 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 08.09.2023
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE Ms. JUSTICE P.T. ASHA
C.S.(Comm.Div.)No.98 of 2021
M/s.Sri Arumuga Sugars Limited,
formerly known as “Sri Arumuga Sugars Pvt. Ltd.,
No.51, Appusamy Layout,
Redfields, Coimbatore – 641045
Rep. by its
Director Mr.V.Satish ...Plaintiff
Vs.
M/s.Integrated Service Point Pvt. Ltd.
No.32, VOC Colony,
Anna Nagar East, Chennai - 600102 ...Defendant
PRAYER: Plaint is filed under under Order IV Rule 1 of O.S. Rules and
Order VII Rule 1 of the CPC and Section 7 of the Commercial Courts,
Commercial Division and Commercial Appellate Division of High Courts
Act, No. 4 of 2016, praying to pass the judgment and decree:-
(1) Granting a mandatory injunction directing the Defendant to
deliver to the plaintiff the duplicate Form 'H' issued by the Office of the
Assistant Commissioner of Sales Tax, Chintadripet, Chennai – 600006
under the proceeding dated 18.02.2021. Or alternatively:
1/13
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.S.No.98 of 2021
2) Direct the defendant to apply for and secure from the Assistant
Commissioner fresh duplicate Form 'H' in lieu of the original Form 'H'
bearing Nos.095852, 095853 and 095988 issued on 20.16.2012, 20.06.2012
and 20.06.2013 respectively, misplaced on 21.08.2019. Or alternatively;
3) Pass a money decree in favour of the Plaintiff and against the
Defendant for a sum of Rs.3,70,70,137/- with further interest @ 24% per
annum on the principal amount of Rs.3,19,08,782/- from date of plaint till
the date of realization of the decreetal amount.
4) Pass and pronounce an order directing the Defendant to pay the
Plaintiff for the costs of the suit proceedings;
5) For such further or other reliefs as may be just and necessary in the
circumstances of the case and thus render justice.
For Plaintiff : M/s.R.Vidhya Shankar
For Defendant : M/s.Mani Sundar Gopal
2/13
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.S.No.98 of 2021
JUDGMENT
The entire suit revolves around the issue as to who would bell the
cat. The suit has been filed for the following reliefs:-
(1) Granting a mandatory injunction directing the Defendant to
deliver to the plaintiff the duplicate Form 'H' issued by the Office of the
Assistant Commissioner of Sales Tax, Chintadripet, Chennai – 600006
under the proceeding dated 18.02.2021. Or alternatively:-
2) Direct the defendant to apply for and secure from the Assistant
Commissioner fresh duplicate Form 'H' in lieu of the original Form 'H'
bearing Nos.095852, 095853 and 095988 issued on 20.16.2012, 20.06.2012
and 20.06.2013 respectively, misplaced on 21.08.2019. Or alternatively;
3) Pass a money decree in favour of the Plaintiff and against the
Defendant for a sum of Rs.3,70,70,137/- with further interest @ 24% per
annum on the principal amount of Rs.3,19,08,782/- from date of plaint till
the date of realization of the decreetal amount.
4) Pass and pronounce an order directing the Defendant to pay the
Plaintiff for the costs of the suit proceedings;
2. The admitted case of both the parties is that the defendant who
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.S.No.98 of 2021
had purchased sugar and molasses from the plaintiff for export had
handed over two copies of 'Form H' to the plaintiff in the year 2012
which had been lost by the plaintiff. Thereafter, the plaintiff had
immediately filed a complaint with the Madukkarai Police Station, on
26.08.2019 and had obtained a non traceable-certificate. He had then
requested the defendant to apply and obtain duplicate 'Form H'
certificates. The Duplicate 'Form H' Certificates applied for and
obtained. It is here that the difference of opinion between the parties
had occurred. It is the case of the plaintiff that these duplicate 'Form H'
certificates were not handed over to them. Whereas, it is the case of the
defendant that 'Form H' Certificates were handed over to the
representative of the plaintiff who had accompanied the defendant's
representative on 18.02.2021.
3. The plaintiff had sent a reminder dated 08.03.2021 calling
upon the defendant to obtain the duplicate 'Form H' certificates. To
this, there has been no response from the defendant which constrained
the plaintiff to send a legal notice dated 18.03.2021. To this legal
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.S.No.98 of 2021
notice, a reply has been sent by the defendant on 26.03.2021, wherein
they have stated that 'Form H' certificates were handed over to the
plaintiff. Hence the suit for the reliefs set out above.
4. This Court by order dated 15.12.2022 was pleased to frame
the following issues:-
1. Whether the three sets of “Form-H”, bearing L1-
295010 to L1-295012 were received by the representative
of the plaintiff, Mr.V.Sathish and representative of the
Defendant, K.Srikanth Apparao, on 18.02.2021 from the
office of the Assistant Commissioner (ST)?
2. Whether the Defendant has proven that he has
delivered the duplicate Form-H to the plaintiff?
3. Whether the Defendant is required to secure
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.S.No.98 of 2021
another set of duplicate Form-H in lieu of the original
Form 'H' bearing Nos.095852, 095853 and 095988 issued
on 20.06.2012, 20.06.2012 and 20.06.2013 from the
Assistant Commissioner of Sales Tax, Chintadripet?
4. Whether duplicate and the original separated by
a perforation from the counterfoil of the Form-H were
collected by Mr.V.Sathish, Representative of the Plaintiff
from Srikanth Apparao, Representative of the Defendant
on 18.02.2021?
5. Whether the claim of the plaintiff in the letter
dated 08.03.2021, that the defendant unilaterally
collected the Form-H from the office of the Assistant
Commissioner Sales Tax (ST) is true ?
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.S.No.98 of 2021
6. Whether the claim of the plaintiff that the
defendant refused to forward the Form-H, collected from
the office of the Assistant Commissioner Sales Tax (ST) is
true?
7. Whether the Defendant has anything to gain by
not handling over the Form-H to the plaintiff after
requesting the Sales Tax Department for issuance of fresh
Form-H on the basis of the request made by the plaintiff?
8. Whether the plaintiff's claim that the defendant is
refusing to handover the fresh Form-H-3 nos is for some
ulterior motive namely to delay and evade of Revenue
Recovery Proceeding vide Ref.No.14160/2021/D3 dated
07.09.2021?
9. Whether the plaintiff is entitled for seeking a
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.S.No.98 of 2021
relief of Money Decree in its favour and against the
defendant for a sum of Rs.3,70,70,137/-?
10. Whether the plaintiff is entitled for any of the
reliefs prayed for?
5. The parties have also gone to trial and on the side of the
plaintiff 1 witness had been examined and Ex.P.1 to Ex.P.17 were
marked. The defendant had examined 2 witnesses and Ex.D.1 to D.9
were marked.
6. However, a mere perusal of the dispute at hand clearly
indicates that the same can be solved by applying for a duplicate 'Form
H' certificate. After initial arguments have been addressed it is seen that
the dispute between the parties is as to who would lodge the complaint
for the loss of 'Form H' Certificates. The plaintiff is now willing to file
the complaint and the defendant is agreeable that once they receive the
non-traceable certificate, they are ready to make a fresh application for
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.S.No.98 of 2021
the second set of duplicate 'Form H' certificates. Since both parties
have arrived at this consensus, the suit can be decreed directing the
plaintiff to lodge a complaint with the jurisdictional police station
informing them about the loss of the 'Form H' certificates and on their
obtaining the non-traceable certificate, the same shall be handed over to
the defendant who shall thereupon make necessary application and
obtain 'Form H' Certificates. Therefore, the suit is decreed for the first
relief with the above directions. Once the 1st relief is granted the other
reliefs become redundant.
7. It is needless to state that on such application being made
accompanied by the non-traceable certificate, the Department shall
issue a duplicate set of the 'Form H' certificates. The suit is decreed
accordingly. No costs.
08.09.2023
Index : Yes/No
Internet : Yes/No
Neutral Citation : Yes/No
shr
APPENDIX
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.S.No.98 of 2021
List of Witness Examined on the side of the Plaintiff:
1. P.W.1 - Mr.V.Satish
List of Exhibits marked on the side of the Plaintiff:-
S.No. Exhibits Description of documents
1. P-1 Board resolution dated 13.10.2021.
2. P-2 Printout of the certificate of Incorporation dated
19.06.2008.
3. P-3 Printout of the certificate of name change of the plaintiff
dated 24.06.2011.
4. P-4 Photocopy of the letter dated 20.06.2012 of Form 'H'
No.095852 under sale order dated 23.01.2012.
5. P-5 Photocopy of the letter dated 20.06.2012 of Form 'H'
No.095853 under sale order dated 02.03.2012.
6. P-6 Photocopy of the letter dated 20.06.2013 of Form 'H'
No.095988 under sale order dated 21.02.2013.
7. P-7 Photocopy of the letter sent to the Inspector of Police,
Madukkarai Police Station, Madukkarai by the plaintiff
dated 26.08.2019.
8. P-8 Photocopy of the CSR No.193/2019 dated 26.08.2019.
9. P-9 Photocopy of the certificate issued by the Inspector of
Police, Madukkarai Police Station, Madukkarai.
10. P-10 Photocopy of the letter sent by the plaintiff to the
defendant dated 22.02.2020.
11. P-11 Photocopy of the letter from the Office of the Assistant
Commissioner (ST) dated 18.02.2021.
12. P-12 Photocopy of the letter sent by the plaintiff to the
defendant dated 08.03.2021.
13. P-13 Photocopy of the legal notice sent by the plaintiff counsel
to the defendant dated 18.03.2021.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.S.No.98 of 2021
S.No. Exhibits Description of documents
14. P-14 Photocopy of the reply to legal notice issued by the
defendant to the plaintiff dated 26.03.2021.
15. P-15 Photocopy of the rejoinder to reply issued by the plaintiff
to the defendant dated 31.03.2021.
16. P-16. Photocopy of the reply to rejoinder issued by the
defendant to the plaintiff dated 05.04.2021.
17. P-17 Photocopy of the order passed by the District Collector,
Coimbatore in revenue recovery proceedings dated
07.09.2021.
List of Witnesses Examined on the side of the Defendants:
1. D.W.1 - Mr.K.Ramnath Apparao
2. D.W.2 - Mr.Srikanth Apparao
List of Exhibits marked on the side of the Defendant:-
S.No. Exhibits Description of documents
1. D-1 Printout of the certificate of Incorporation of the
defendant dated 01.06.1999.
2. D-2 Original letter sent by the plaintiff to the defendant dated
08.03.2021.
3. D-3 Original legal notice sent by the plaintiff to the defendant
dated 18.03.2021.
4 D-4 Office copy of the reply notice sent by the defendant to
the plaintiff dated 26.03.2021.
5. D-5 Original rejoinder notice sent by the plaintiff to the
defendant dated 31.03.2021.
6. D-6 Office copy of the reply to the rejoinder sent by the
defendant to the plaintiff dated 05.04.2021.
7. D-7 Printout of the GST registration certificate of the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.S.No.98 of 2021
S.No. Exhibits Description of documents
defendant.
8 D-8 Original board resolution dated 10.12.2021.
9 D-9 Section 65B affidavit filed for Ex.D.1 and Ex.D.7.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.S.No.98 of 2021
P.T. ASHA, J,
shr
C.S.(Comm.Div.)No.98 of 2021
08.09.2023
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
