1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION SUIT NO.838 OF 2003 M/s.K.M.Bros & Anr. ...Plaintiffs vs. M/s.Continental Liner Agencies ...Defendant Ms S.S.Dwivedi for the plaintiffs None for the defendants CORAM :A.S.OKA,J. DATE : NOVEMBER 9, 2009 JUDGMENT : 1 The suit has been shown under the caption Undefended suits for exparte decree . The plaintiffs have filed the present suit for decree in favour of the second plaintiff in the sum of Rs.2,84,384.00 with interest thereon at the rate of 18% per annum from the date of suit till realisation. 2 The first plaintiff had imported a consignment from Yangon, Myanmar Port in Singapore more particularly described in the invoice dated 25 th September 2002. The case of the plaintiffs is that the first plaintiff had entrusted the said consignment to the defendant at Yangon, Mayammar Port in Singapore in a properly and securely packed condition by sea to the Port of Mumbai by the ship M.V. AL Muztuba. The defendant issued a Bill of Lading dated 25 th September 2002 acknowledging the receipt of the said consignment in securely and 2 packed condition. The defendant undertook to deliver the suit consignment at the Port of Bombay. The case of the plaintiff is that the consignment was delivered in short and in a damaged condition. The authorities of the Bombay Port Trust issued a Landing Remark Certificate. The survey of the suit consignment conducted by M/s.V.K.Agarwal, Surveyors and Loss Assessor who submitted a report dated 22 nd November 2002. The consignment was also surveyed by the ship surveyors M/s.Pinnacle marine Services Pvt.Ltd who have issued a Ship Survey report. From the surveyors report it was clear that that the shortage was equivalent to 6.104 Metric tones. It is asserted that the first plaintiff lodged a claim on 9 th December 2002. However, there was no response to the said claim. The consignment was insured against all risks in transit by the second plaintiff under a policy of insurance. It is asserted that the second plaintiff has paid to the first plaintiff the claim amount of Rs.2,84,354/-. The first plaintiff executed a letter of Subrogation in favour of second plaintiff. 3 As stated earlier, no written statement has been filed by the defendant. The plaintiffs have filed the affidavit of one Suresh Laxman Jagtap, an Assistant Manager of the second plaintiff. The plaintiffs have produced the original documents on record including the 3 invoice, bill of lading, certificate issued by the B.P.T as well as surveyors reports. The letter of subrogation is also placed on record. The affidavit and the documents prove the claim of the plaintiffs. 4 Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the further interest deserves to be fixed at the rate of 12% per annum. 5 Hence, I pass the following order : i) The suit stands decreed in terms of prayer clause (a) with modification that the interest payable from the date of suit shall be at the rate of 12% per annum. ii)The plaintiffs will be entitled to refund of court fees as per the rules. JUDGE