1 34 sj.269.09 ndm IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION SUMMONS FOR JUDGMENT NO. 269 OF 2009 IN SUMMARY SUIT NO. 2411 OF 2008 Pushti Electricals Pvt. Ltd. ... Plaintiff Versus M/s. Electrotek. ... Defendant ----- Mr. Nishant Sasidharan with Mr. Darshan R. Mehta i/b M/s. Dhruve Liladhar and Company for the Plaintiff. None for the Defendant. ----- CORAM : A.S.OKA, J. DATE : 19 th January, 2011. JUDGMENT: 1 The learned counsel appearing for the Plaintiff states that summons for judgment has been duly served on the Defendant in July, 2009 and still no reply has been filed. 2 The suit is filed for recovery of price of goods sold and delivered to the Defendant. The learned counsel appearing for the Plaintiff has tendered on record a compilation of the original documents, which is marked as ‘X’ for identification. The original invoices on which 2 34 sj.269.09 the claim is based are placed on record. Copies of the correspondence made between the parties are placed on record. The Defendant has replied to the notice of demand by reply dated 16 th March, 2008. The claim has not been disputed in the said reply and in fact, the Defendant informed the advocate for the Plaintiff that the payment will be released at the end of the financial year. 3 In view of clause (a) of sub-Rule 6 of Rule 3 of Order XXXVII of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, the Plaintiff is entitled to a judgment. Further interest has been claimed at the rate of 21% per annum on the basis of a clause in the invoices. Interest deserves to be fixed at the rate of 18% per annum. 4 Accordingly, summons for judgment is made absolute and the suit stands decreed as prayed with modification that the interest will be payable on the principal amount of Rs.4,18,431/- at the rate of 18% per annum from the date of filing of the suit till payment and/or realization. 5 The Plaintiff will be entitled to refund of Court-fees as per the rules. [ A.S.OKA, J ]