1 sj159-09.sxw pps IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION Summons for Judgment No. 159 of 2009 in Summary Suit No. 1931 of 2008 Isagro (Asia) Agro Chemical Pvt. Ltd. .. Plaintiffs v/s. Krishna Maruti Chafle ..Defendant Mr.Sachin V. Masurkar for the Plaintiffs. Mr.P.V.Badadare i/b. Ganesh K. Kole for the Defendants CORAM : R.Y.GANOO, J. DATED : 14th October , 2010 P.C. : 1. Heard learned Counsel on both sides. Plaintiffs had delivered goods to the defendants covered by the three invoices annexed to the plaint. Value of the goods sold to the defendant by the three invoices turns out to be Rs.1,19,331/- . The invoices mention rate of interest as 21%. Plaintiffs claim that defendant delivered to plaintiff a cheque dated 13.4.2005 for a sum of Rs.2,02,571/- towards the repayment of the amount. The said cheque came to be dishonoured for reasons 2 sj159-09.sxw “Funds insufficient” on 28.4.2005. 2. Defendant has filed the affidavit in reply and has contended that three cheques were given to the plaintiffs in year 1999 by way of security without filling the particulars, and the cheque bearing No.2410273 which is relied upon by the plaintiffs in this suit is also covered by those three cheques. The Defendant has claimed that certain quantity of goods were returned and that is how the defendant has come out with the same explanation for non payment of monies to that extent. With all that the defendant has admitted in para 5 of the affidavit in reply that defendant was liable to pay to plaintiffs Rs.72,821.73 instead of Rs.1,19,331/-. 3. After having considered the record, I am inclined to observe that the explanation given by the defendant as regards the dishonoured cheque for Rs.2,00,000/- and odd amount cannot be accepted. The defendant having parted with blank instrument had authorized the plaintiffs to fill in the particulars whenever they were required. Nothing is placed before the court to show that at the time when the cheques were delivered, they were delivered by way of security. 3 sj159-09.sxw Apart from above, it is inconceivable looking to the fact that defendant as an individual who was in need of goods from a limited company would voluntarily deliver blank cheques duly signed in the hands of the plaintiffs in expectation that the plaintiffs would care to deliver the goods in future. The story of the defendant that cheques were delivered by way of security cannot be accepted. The admission on the part of the defendant as regards liability to the tune of Rs.72,000/- makes me to hold that the plaintiffs are entitled to decree to the extent of the said amount along with interest at the rate of 21% per annum as set out in the invoices. 4. In the circumstances mentioned aforesaid, the decree will have to be passed against the defendant to the tune of Rs.72,821.73 and defendant will have to be put to terms to deposit the sum of Rs. 1,29,750/- being the amount arrived at after deducting Rs.72,821/- from Rs.2,02,571/- i.e. the amount covered by the dishonoured cheque. 5. In view of the above, Summons for Judgement is disposed of by passing following order. 4 sj159-09.sxw ORDER i. Defendant do pay to plaintiffs Rs.72,821/-. ii. Defendant do pay to plaintiffs interest at the rate of 21% per annum from 14.10.2002 till realization. Iii. Defendant to deposit in this court sum of Rs.1,29,750/- as a part of condition to defend the rest of the claim of the plaintiffs. iv. Defendant to deposit this amount of Rs.1,29,750/- on or before 11.1.2011. Defendant to file written statement on or before 21.1.2011 directly in the office. Defendant to serve copy of written statement upon the advocate for the plaintiffs within 10 days from filing of the same. v. Summons for judgment is disposed of in above terms with no order as to costs. [R.Y.GANOO, J.]