IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED : 07.12.2011 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE P.R.SHIVAKUMAR.J C.S.No.654 of 2009 M/s.Chitrakoot Steel and Power Private Limited Regd. Office at No.22 (Old No.12) 1st Cross Street, C.I.T. Colony Mylapore, Chennai-600 004 Rep. By its Director G.Gautam Reddy .. Plaintiff Vs. M/s.Yeses Infrastructure Private Limited Regd. Office at 'Siva Sai Nilayam' 6-2-918/3/10, Opp. To State Bank of India Khairatabad, Hyderabad-500 004 Rep. By its Managing Director S.Subrahamanyam Naidu .. Defendant Plaint filed under Order IV Rule 1 of the O S Rules r/w Order VII Rule 1 of CPC for a judgment and decree against the defendant (a) directing the defendant to pay to the plaintiff a sum of Rs.33,18,284/-; (b) to pay the interest at 18% p.a. on the said amount of Rs.21,66,385/- from the date of plaint till the date of realisation of the said amount b) to pay the cost of the suit and c) further order or orders as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. For Plaintiff : Mr.V.Deenadayalan For Defendant : Set ex-parte on 23.09.2011) ------- JUDGMENT The defendant remains ex-parte. In the ex-parte trial, https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ PW-1 was examined and Exs.P1 to P80 were marked in order to prove the plaintiff's case. The suit has been filed by the plaintiff against the defendant for the recovery of a sum of Rs.33,18,284/- with future interest at the rate of 18% per annum on Rs.21,66,385/-, the principal component of the claim, from the date of plaint till date of realisation. 2. The plaint averment is that the plaintiff is a private limited company engaged in the manufacture of sponge iron and dealing with ferrous and non-ferrous metal melting furnaces etc; that the defendant, who claims to deal with structural fabrication and erection work for sponge iron unit, approached the plaintiff for the work order for structural fabrication and erection work with the plaintiff's industry; that at the request of the defendant, plaintiff gave a work order No.001/2004-05 dated 28.09.2004 to the defendant and that the defendant failed and neglected to complete the work assigned to them as per the terms and conditions detailed in the said work order. The plaintiff's further case is that since the defendant did not complete the work as per the above terms of the work order, the plaintiff was constrained to engage several other contractors and work force to complete the said work paying necessary charges and fees to them totalling a sum of Rs.1,73,329/- vide various receipts and vouchers; that the defendant had received an excess amount of Rs.21,66,385/- as on 31.01.2006 excluding the idling https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ charges of Rs.7,00,000/-, which the plaintiff had voluntarily paid to the defendant; that the plaintiff had also paid a sum of Rs.2,04,269/- in view of the request made by the defendant, as he was in financial crisis; that in the circumstances the defendant has made false claim by various letters contrary to the statement of accounts and the defendant's admission; that the defendant was liable to pay a sum of Rs.21,66,385/- towards the amount due and a sum of Rs.11,51,899/- towards interest at 18% per annum till date and in all totalling to a sum of Rs.33,18,284 as on the date of plaint and that therefore the plaintiff has filed this suit for recovery of the said amount along with an interest @ 18% per annum on Rs.21,66,385/- from the date of plaint till the date of realisation. 3. Mr.M.Penchal Naidu, Finance Manager of the plaintiff's company has deposed as PW-1 and filed a proof affidavit. Eighty documents have been marked in support of the claim of the plaintiff. Ex.P1 is the authorisation letter issued by the plaintiff to PW1 to depose as a witness. Ex.P2 is the work order dated 28.09.2004. Ex.P3 is the request letter for advance dated 13.09.2005. Ex.P4 is the receipt dated 14.09.2005. Ex.P5 is the xerox copy of the receipt for TDS dated 19.09.2005. Ex.P6 is the letter cum annexure statement dated 31.01.2006. Ex.P7 is the letter with postal receipt dated 02.05.2006. Ex.P8 is the TDS certificate dated 31.05.2006. Ex.P9 is the TDS https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ certificate dated 21.06.2006. Ex.P10 is the letter of TDS certificate dated 24.07.2006. Ex.P11 is the letter and courier receipts dated 17.04.2007. Exs.P12 to P15 are statement of accounts relating to the periods between 01.04.2004 to 31.03.2008. Exs.P16 to Ex.76 are various payment receipts. Ex.P77 is the legal notice dated 06.06.2008 issued by the defendant to the plaintiff. Ex.P78 is the resolution of the Board of Directors of the plaintiff company. Ex.P79 is the reply notice dated 28.06.2008. Ex.P80 is the postal acknowledgment dated 30.06.2008 evidencing receipt of notice by the defendant. 4. Upon considering the above evidence, this court is satisfied that the claim of the plaintiff for recovery of a sum of Rs.33,18,284/- stands proved by the evidence of PW-1 and the documents produced by the plaintiff as Exs.P1 to P80. As per the proviso to Section 34 of the CPC, in case the liability of the defendant has arisen out of a commercial transaction, the post decree rate of interest may exceed 6%, but shall not exceed the contractual rate. In this case, since the liability of the defendant has arisen out of a commercial transaction, this court deems it appropriate to grant pendente lite interest @ 18% per annum as a reasonable rate of interest and post decree interest also at the very same rate. The plaintiff shall also be entitled to recover litigation cost from the defendant. 5. In the result, a decree is passed in favour of the https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ plaintiff directing the defendant to pay a sum of Rs.33,18,284/- to the plaintiff together with an interest on Rs.21,66,385/-, the principal component of the claim, calculated at the rate of 18% per annum from the date of plaint till the date of decree and a further interest on the above said amount at the very same rate from the date of decree till realisation and also cost. sd/.P.R.S.J 07.12.2011 //Certified to be a true copy// Dated this the day of 2016 R.s/01.03.2016 COURT OFFICER From 25.09.2008 the Registry is issuing certified copies of the Order/Judgment Decree in this format. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/