*1* sj.231.09 kps IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION SUMMONS FOR JUDGMENT NO.231 OF 2009 IN SUMMARY SUIT NO.940 OF 2009 Soham Arts.. ..Plaintiff -Versus- Speed Print. ..Defendant .......... Poonam Mittal, for the Plaintiff. Devasis Mitra i/b Legal Assistance, for the Defendant. .......... CORAM : S.C.DHARMADHIKARI, J. DATE : 23rd November, 2010. P.C. 1 Heard the learned counsel for the Plaintiff and the Defendant. Perused the plaint and annexures thereto, particularly the invoice at Exhibit-A to the plaint bearing No.1707. 2 The specific stand of the Defendant is that it is not carrying on business from Mumbai but from Kolkata. Further the buyer’s name in the invoice is a distinct company. Secondly, the goods under the subject invoice were not received. On query from the Court as to whether the Plaintiff has any proof of goods under the subject invoice having been dispatched and delivered; except stating that they have been dispatched by tempo on 02.08.2007 nothing has been stated nor any document is produced. The discrepancy stated in the invoice is fortified by the fact that in the letter of demand, the Plaintiff’s Advocate has not referred to the invoice at Exhibit-A, therefore, the very existence of the invoice raises a serious triable issue. *2* sj.231.09 3 For all these reasons, the Summons for Judgment is dismissed. The Defendant is granted unconditional leave to defend the suit. The suit is transferred to the list of commercial causes. Written Statement to be filed within a period of four weeks from today. (S.C. Dharmadhikari, J)