1 srk IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION SUIT NO. 2756 OF 1984 National Textile Corporation Ltd. New Delhi & Ors. ............................ Plaintiffs vs M/s. V.R. Textile ................................ Defendant .. Ms. Vaneeta Kachwalia i/b M/s Kachwalia & Partners for Plaintiffs None for Defendant. .. CORAM: A.S.OKA, J. DATE: 19th November, 2009 JUDGMENT: 1 The plaintiffs have filed this suit for recovery of a sum of Rs. 1,78,720/- together with further interest on the amount of Rs.1,18,422.53 at the rate of 21% per annum from the date of the institution of the suit till realisation or payment. 2 The first plaintiff is the National Textile Corporation (M.N.) Ltd. and the second plaintiff is the National Textile Corporation (S.M.) Ltd. According to the plaintiffs with effect from 18th October, 1983 under an Ordinance, the management of thirteen Textile undertakings came to be vested in the Union of India. Under the said ordinance, the Union of India was authorized to appoint any person or body of persons as a Custodian of the Textile Undertakings. Accordingly, the National Textile Corporation 2 Ltd., New Delhi was appointed as the Custodian. The said Custodian appointed the National Textile Corporation (SM) Ltd. (second plaintiff) as additional Custodian. On 26th December, 1983 by virtue of the Textile Undertaking (Taking over Management) Act, 1983 the management of the aforesaid textile undertakings vested in the Custodian. Under the said Act, the appointment of additional custodian was ratified. 3 Reliance is placed on the Textile Undertakings (Nationalisation) Act, 1995. By virtue of the said Act, on 1st April, 1994 the right, title and interest of the owners of the said thirteen Textile Mills undertakings vested with the Union of India. In view of the sub section 2 of section 3 of the said Act, immediately after such vesting such textile undertakings stood transferred in favour of the National Textile Corporation Ltd. It is stated that the undertaking of the Kohinoor Mills along-with certain other Mills was transferred in favour of the first plaintiff-the National Textile Corporation (MN) Ltd. 4 According to the case of the plaintiffs there were dealings between the said Kohinoor Mills and defendants under which said Mills used to supply and deliver cloth materials to the defendants. According to the plaintiffs, on scrutiny of the record, it was found that the defendants are liable to pay a sum of Rs. 1,18,422.53 to the said Kohinoor Mills. Therefore, along-with 3 letter dated 22nd December, 1983, the advocate for the plaintiffs called upon the defendants to pay the said amount together with interest. There was a reply sent by the defendants to the said letter disputing the liability. Reliance is placed on the another letter dated 30th May, 1984 sent to the defendants. By the said letter, the defendants were called upon to pay the said amount with interest. As compliance was not made, the present suit has been filed. 5 The particulars of the claim of the plaintiffs in the suit have been set out in Exhibit “E”. Apart from the principal amount of Rs. 1,18,422.53, the plaintiffs have claimed interest on the said amount at the rate of 21% per annum from 29th December, 1981 till 31st May, 1984 being sum of Rs. 67,097,47. 6 A Written statement was filed by the defendants. In the written statement it was contended that one Balbir Singh was the Director of the Company known as Kohinoor Mills Co.Ltd. According to the case of the defendants prior to 18th October, 1983, they were dealing with the said company. According to the defendants that said Balbir Singh represented to them that in respect of supplies made, payments should be made to M/s Randhir Singh & Company. It is contended that accordingly, payments were made by the defendants to M/s Randhir Singh & Company and entire liability towards Kohinoor Mills Company Ltd. stands discharged. 4 7 After issues were settled, the suit was taken up for hearing. The plaintiffs have examined only one witness Mr. R.M. Deshmukh who filed an affidavit in lieu of examination-in-chief at Exhibit ‘P1’. The documents produced by the plaintiffs have marked as Exhibits ‘P-1 to P-10’ respectively. None appeared for the defendants when the evidence of the said witness was recorded. No cross examination of the said witness was made by the defendants. Today, when the suit is called out none appeared for the defendants. 8 In the affidavit in lieu of evidence, reliance has been placed on the document marked as Exhibit P-2 which is a statement of account of the defendants. It is stated in the affidavit that as per the statement of account, the total sale effected by the said Mills to the defendants during April, 1981 to July, 1982 was of the goods amounting to Rs. 13,16,723.36 against which a total payment of Rs. 12,13,381.72 was received. Thus, it is stated that balance amount payable by the defendants is Rs. 1,03,341.64. The Invoice at Exhibit ‘P-3’ has been duly proved. The documents at Exhibit P-4, P-5 and P-6 are gate passes issued in the name of the defendants to prove the delivery of the goods. Office copies of the letter dated 22nd December, 1983 and 30th May, 1984 have been placed on record and the same have been proved. The document at Exhibit P-2 being the account of the defendant maintained by 5 the said Mills proves the liability of the defendants to the extent of Rs.1,03,341.64 as on 18th October, 1983. The defendants have not established their defence that the payment has been made in favour of M/s Randhir Singh and Company. As far as interest is concerned it must be stated here that there is no agreement reflected from any of the documents to pay the interest at the rate of 21% per annum. Therefore, interest will have to be fixed at the rate of 6% per annum from 18th October, 1983 till the date of the institution of the suit. Even further interest at the same rate will have to be granted. 9 Hence, I pass following order: 1 The defendants are ordered and decreed to pay the plaintiffs a sum of Rs. 1,03,341.64 together with interest thereon at the rate of 6% per annum from 18th October, 1983 till the date of passing of the decree and further interest at the rate of 6% per annum on the said amount of Rs.1,03,341.64 at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of passing decree till realization or payment of the amount. 2 The defendants shall pay proportionate costs of the suit to the plaintiffs. Judge.