- 1 - 9.ss.3151.10 skt IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION SUMMARY SUIT NO. 3151 OF 2010 Upendra Rao ..Plaintiff -Versus- Desarch Enterprises ..Defendant .......... Mr. Nagendra Dube for the Plaintiff. None for the Defendant. .......... CORAM : S.J. VAZIFDAR, J. DATE : 21ST DECEMBER 2011. P.C. 1 The suit is filed to recover the amounts due for the work done by the plaintiff for the defendant. 2 Pursuant to the negotiations, the defendant requested the plaintiff to carry out certain interior work in the defendant’s clients’ premises. The contract was however between the plaintiff and the defendant. The plaintiff under cover of a letter dated 29th November 2008 forwarded the rates. The defendant did not raise any dispute regarding the same. The plaintiff therefore carried out the work and raised invoices. There was no dispute raised by the defendant despite the fact that prior to the plaintiff raising - 2 - 9.ss.3151.10 invoices, the defendant had inspected the work. There was no reply to the plaintiff’s notices demanding payment. 3 The plaintiff has examined himself by filing his affidavit in lieu of examination-in-chief dated 14th December 2011. The plaintiff has affirmed the correctness of what is stated therein. The plaintiff also tendered a compilation of documents which is taken on record and marked ‘A’ collectively. The defendant was absent. There was no cross-examination. 4 There is nothing on record and militates against the plaintiffs claim. I see no reason to disregard what the plaintiff has stated especially in view of the fact that there was no cross-examination and the fact that the defendant has not filed a written statement and has remained absent throughout. 5 In the circumstances, the suit is decreed as prayed. However, interest after the date of the suit shall be at the rate of 12% p.a. . Costs to be quantified as per rules. Refund, if any, as per rules.