1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY O. O. C. J. SUIT NO.3375 OF 1997 Ashok Sharma & Associates Pvt. Ltd. ...Plaintiff. Versus Phoenix Industries Ltd. ...Defendant. ....... Mr.Hemant S. Sethi for the Plaintiff. None for the Defendant. ...... CORAM : DR. D.Y. CHANDRACHUD, J. July 20, 2009. P.C.: The suit has been instituted for the recovery of an amount of Rs.3,45,400/- and for a declaration that the purported termination of contract dated 10th September 1994 is invalid. In the alternative, damages have been claimed in the sum of Rs.87,991/-. Prayer clause (c ) which is an alternative claim for damages is not pressed. -2. On 21st October 1993, the Defendant entered into a contract with the Plaintiff for advertising the products of the Defendant on 200 panels of BEST Buses during the period 1st December 1993 to 30th November 1994. Under the terms of payment, 2 the Defendant was to pay quarterly bills raised by the Plaintiff. The Defendant paid three bills each for one quarter. The bill for the last quarter - 1st April 1994 to 30th November 1994 – dated 1st August 1994, was raised in the amount of Rs.2,24,400/-. The Defendant received the bill on 8th August 1994, but failed to make payment. Instead, on 10th September 1994, the Defendant requested the Plaintiff to cancel the contract. The case of the Plaintiff is that the contract could have terminated only in extreme circumstances, by giving fifteen days' clear advance notice and on paying the Plaintiff removal charges as well as one third of the amount of rentals for the unexpired period of contract by way of liquidated damages. The Plaintiff called upon the Defendant by a letter dated 10th September 1994 to pay the liquidated damages which were not paid. The Plaintiff had stated that being an agent of the BEST Undertaking, he was required to pay rentals in advance to the Undertaking for display of advertisements on their buses. The Plaintiff has produced the advertising record sheet for the relevant period to establish that during the period in question, the products of the Defendant were 3 duly advertised by the Plaintiff on the buses belonging to the BEST Undertaking. Thereafter, several letters were addressed to the Defendant despite which no payment was made. -3. The Defendant has been served with the writ of summons, but has failed to enter appearance. In the circumstances, the case of the Plaintiff has not been controverted. The Plaintiff has relied upon the affidavit of evidence of its Director and on a compilation of the original documents. The claim has been duly proved. The Plaintiff has proved the terms for display of advertisements; the fact that the Plaintiff did, as a matter of fact, display the advertisements of the Defendant and the default of the Defendant in paying the dues for the last quarter. In these circumstances, the suit shall stand decreed in terms of prayer clauses (a), (b) and (d) with the modification that the Plaintiff will be entitled to interest at the rate of 9% p.a. on the principal sum of Rs.2,24,400/- from the date of the suit, until payment or realization. .......