1 ss1098-11 vai IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION SUMMARY SUIT NO.1098 OF 2011 KMI Business Technologies Pvt. Ltd. ....Plaintiff V/s. Shri Nizar Ali, Prop. of M/s.Associated Computers ....Defendant Ms.Payal Parikh i/b Akshar Laws for the Plaintiff. None for the Defendant. CORAM : S.J. VAZIFDAR, J. DATE : 19TH OCTOBER, 2011. P.C. :- 1. The suit is filed to recover the price of the goods sold and delivered by the plaintiff to the defendant on the terms and conditions contained in the invoice. The defendant has failed and neglected to make payment despite the plaintiff’s advocates notice demanding payment. The defendant has not filed any appearance. The defendant is absent. 2. A compilation of documents is tendered in Court, taken on record and marked “X”. 3. The plaintiff’s advocate desires to lead evidence and in fact tendered an affidavit in lieu of the examination in chief. However, in view of the facts and circumstances of the case, I did not consider it 2 ss1098-11 necessary for the plaintiff to do so and therefore, directed return of the affidavit in lieu of the examination in chief. 4. There is no defence to the suit. There is nothing on record that militates against the averments and submissions in the plaint. 5. The invoice does not contain any provision for interest. However, the notice demanding payment dated 8.12.2008, demanded interest at 18% p.a. 6. In the circumstances, the suit is decreed as prayed. However, interest after the date of the suit shall be at the rate of 12% p.a. Costs to be quantified as per rules. Refund, if any, as per rules.