- 1 - IN IN IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORDINARY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION jmi SUIT NO.573 OF 2000. M/s.Kamdhenu Valves Pvt.Ltd. ..Plaintiffs. vs. M/s.Atlas Auto Components Inc. ..Defendants. .... Mr.Mahendra Rathod, a/w. Mr.M.S.Shah, i/b. M/s.Shantilal & Co., for the Plaintiffs. None for the Defendants. .... CORAM CORAM CORAM: S.J.KATHAWALLA, J. S.J.KATHAWALLA, J. S.J.KATHAWALLA, J. DATE DATE DATE : 29TH JANUARY 2009 : 29TH JANUARY 2009 : 29TH JANUARY 2009. P.C.: P.C.: P.C.: . This suit has appeared under the caption "Ex-parte Decree". The learned Advocate appearing for the plaintiffs has tendered on record an affidavit of evidence of Mr.Ishwar Manilal Mitta, director of plaintiffs-Company dated 21st December 1999 and also an additional affidavit dated 28th January 2009 of the same deponent. The said affidavits dated 21st December 1999 and 28th January 2009 are taken on record and marked ‘X’ & ‘X-1’ for identification. 2. The plaintiffs-Company is registered under the Indian Companies Act, 1956 and is carrying on business inter-alia pertaining to automobile engine valves. The defendants are the proprietory concern of one Rajiv Hivale, who was an employee of the plaintiffs-Company upto 1st June 1998. - 2 - 3. The plaintiffs have stated that between July 1998 and 30th September 1998, the defendants have placed oral orders with the plaintiffs for purchase of engine valves. The said goods were supplied by the plaintiffs to the defendants. The plaintiffs have produced alongwith the evidence, 11 challans/ delivery memos in Exh-P-1 to Exh-P-11, bearing the defendants’ signature, acknowledging receipts of the said goods. These goods sold and supplied to the defendants, were worth Rs.3,74,629/-. 4. The plaintiffs have submitted that the defendants have received the said goods and made part payment of Rs.29,039/- and thereafter returned goods on 9th August 1998, 31st August 1998, 31st August 1998 & 29th September 1998 of the value of Rs.14,553/-, Rs. 91,361/- Rs.20,374/-, Rs.83,779/- respectively. The plaintiffs stated that the total value of the goods received by them from the defendants is RS.2,10,067/-. 5. The plaintiffs have stated that after giving credit of part payment of Rs.29,039/- and the value of the goods returned by the defendants i.e. Rs.2,10,067/- a sum of Rs.1,35,523/- remained due and payable to the plaintiffs by the defendants. Since the said amount was - 3 - not forthcoming, the plaintiffs through their Advocate’s notice dated 10th May 1999 called upon the defendants to pay the balance amount of Rs.1,35,523/- to the plaintiffs. Since the defendants failed and neglected to pay the said amount, the plaintiffs filed the present suit. 6. I have perused the averments made in the plaint and the documents annexed to the affidavit of evidence. The documents at Exh-P-1 to Exh-P-11 proves that the plaintiffs have supplied goods to the defendants as set out therein worth Rs.3,74,629/- which were received by the defendants, The documents at Exh-P-12 & P-13 shows that the defendants have returned goods to the plaintiffs value of which is Rs.91,361/-, Rs.14,553/-, 20,374/-, 83,779/-. Though most of the goods are returned without any covering letter, the plaintiffs have fairly admitted that the they have received the said goods and the total value of the goods returned by the defendants is of Rs.2,10,067/-. Despite the plaintiffs’ Advocate notice dated 10th May 1999 issued to the defendants (Exh-P-13), the defendants have not responded to the same nor have they made any payments thereafter. 7. There is no contest by the defendants and what is - 4 - stated in the plaint/affidavits of evidence has gone unchallenged. There is no reason why the case made out by the plaintiffs should not be accepted. By prayer clause (a), the plaintiffs have sought an order and decree against the defendants to pay a sum of Rs.1,59,917/- which includes interest on Rs.1,35,523/- at the rate of 18% per annum till 30th September 1999 and further interest on the said principal sum of Rs.1,35,523/- from the date of filing of the suit till payment and/or realisation. 8. In my view, the prayer made in the plaint deserves to be granted. Hence, the suit is decreed in terms of prayer clause (a). In view thereof, the suit stands disposed of. Refund of Court fees as per rules. [S.J.KATHAWALLA, [S.J.KATHAWALLA, [S.J.KATHAWALLA, J.] J.] J.]