1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION SUMMONS FOR JUDGMENT NO.314 OF 2008 IN SUMMARY SUIT NO.1335 OF 2008 SUNITA DAMODARLAL BAJAJ ..PLAINTIFF VS. RGK CONTROLS & COMPONENTS PVT LTD. ..DEFENDANTS Mr. Vinod K Sharma for the Plaintiff Mr. Mahesh Thorat for the Defendants CORAM: Smt. ROSHAN DALVI, J. DATED : 9 th APRIL, 2009 P.C.: 1. The Plaintiff has sued under the written contract reflected in Plaintiff's 12 invoices signed by both the parties showing dispatch of goods by the Plaintiff and the acceptance of the case by the Defendants. The delivery is admitted. The Plaintiff has delivered switches from time to time between May 2006 and October 2006. 2. Thereafter there has been correspondence between the 2 parties. Under the first email of the Defendants no dispute with regard to any defect is raised. Under the letter of the Defendants dated 06.01.2007, the Defendants forwarded rejected rotary switches of the Plaintiff and called upon the Plaintiff to acknowledge receipt. This was because ''there are quality problems'' as mentioned in their letter. By a further letter dated 09.01.2007 the Defendants issued a debit note for Rs.2,32,082 /- towards the value of the rejected switches and the debit note to the Plaintiff for the reference and accounting. They sent further rejected material to the Plaintiff. 3. The Plaintiff issued a winding up notice on 15.01.2007. The receipt letter dated 05.01.2007 was acknowledged in that notice. The Plaintiff expressed shocked to receive that letter. The Plaintiff denies receipt of material which was returned by the Defendants. 4. The Defendants replied that letter on 20.01.2007. The Defendants expressed surprise at the refusal by the Plaintiff to accept the rejected material. 5. Thereafter the Plaintiff gave notice for winding and filed winding up Petition. The Defendants admitted part 3 amount. The Defendants disputed the liability for the remainder. The Defendants sought to offer amount. The Plaintiff sought to accept without prejudice. The amount offered has been paid. The remainder of the amount is disputed. The Defendant has claimed that, that was upon rejected goods since the goods were defective. 6. It is seen that within a reasonable time being three months of the last of the goods being supplied. The Defendants have shown the defects and rejected the material and returned that material to the Plaintiff. There is, therefore, substantial defence. It will be for the Defendants to prove that the goods which were rejected and returned were defective. The Defendants shall have unconditional leave to file the suit. The Defendants shall file their written statement within 8 weeks. (Smt. Roshan Dalvi, J)