- 1 - rng IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION SUMMARY SUIT NO.3484 OF 2008 KGK Creations (India) Pvt.Ltd ... Plaintiff vs Chandani Gems Pvt.Ltd .. Defendant Ms Akansha Thakkar i.b M/s Purnanand & Co for Plaintiff None for Defendant CORAM: R.V.MORE,J DATED: January 12, 2010 P.C. 1. The above Summary suit is filed under the provisions of Order XXXVII Rule 2 of the C.P.C. against the defendants for recovery of an amount of Rs.5,64.353/- along with further interest at the rate of 24 % on the principal amount of Rs.4,10,955/- from the date of filing the said suit till realisation thereof. The Writ of summons along with copy of the plaint is served upon the defendants. The plaintiff has also filed service affidavit pointing out that the defendant is served. Inspite of the above facts, the defendant has not bothered to put in appearance in the suit and therefore the suit is placed under the caption “ exparte decree”. 2. The plaintiff is a private limited company incorporated under the Companies Act 1956 and is carrying - 2 - on business of manufacturing and trading of diamond Precious and Semi-precious studded gold jewellery. The defendant is also a private limited company incorporated under the companies Act 1956 and is also trading in diamonds gold jewellery. It is the case of the plaintiff that in pursuance of an order placed by the defendants, the plaintiff from the month of January 2006 to March 2007 sold supplied and delivered to the defendant gold and diamond ornaments. It is plaintiff’s case that on receipt of the said goods, the defendant has from to time paid Rs.4,35,291/- under the invoices raised by the plaintiff up to 19.10.2006. 3. It is the specific case of the plaintiff that the defendant however, failed and neglected to make the payment in respect of the goods sold, supplied and delivered of the quality and description mentioned in the following invoices aggregating to a sum of Rs.4,10,955/- as follows : --------------------------------------------------------- Sr.No. Invoice No.& Amt Recd Amt Balance Date -------------------------------------------------------- 1. 604/2006-07 82,807/- 20,000/- 62,807/- dt.29.1.2007 2. 700/2006-07 1,42,168/- Nil 1,42,168 - 3 - dt.24.2.2007 3. 715/2006-07 2,05,868/- Nil 2,05,868 dt 3.3.2007 4. Bank charges 112/- Nil 112/- 4. The defendant accepted the goods mentioned in the above invoices without raising any dispute as to quality, quantity or price in respect of the invoice at serial no. 1, in respect of goods mentioned in rest of two invoices, the plaintiff as per business practice alongwith invoice also issued Acknowledgment of Entrustment (Jangad notes). 5. As per the acknowledgment of entrustment (Jangad Notes) the defendant have been entrusted the said goods for the purpose of approval and return only and the defendant does not acquire any right in respect of the said goods or interest till a sale note is signed and as per the terms of the aforesaid invoices the defendant are liable to make payment within a period of 30 days failing which the defendant were liable to pay 2 % interest charge per month on the defaulted amount from its due date till payment. 6. As per the terms of the aforesaid invoices the defendant had the 30 day credit period and therefore if the goods supplied and delivered to defendant under the - 4 - acknowledgment of entrustment (Jangad Note) are not returned within 30 days the defendant is bound to pay the amount due and payable under the said invoice. 7. The defendant in discharge of their liability of the aforesaid invoices issued cheque bearing No.612948 dated 3.2.2007 for a sum of Rs.40,000/- drawn on the Industrial Development Bank of India Limited, Kalbadevi branch. Moreover 2nd cheque was dishonoured for the reason ‘insufficient funds.’ The defendant in the month of August 2007 paid an amount of Rs.20,000/-in cash to the plaintiff leaving a balance of Rs.4,10,955/-. 8. The plaintiff by their letter dated 6.10.2007 25.1.2008 and 7.3.2008 repeatedly reminded the defendant to pay the above balance amount. However, the defendant has neglected to pay the sum. Again the plaintiff by their letter dated 4.4.2008 called upon the defendant to pay the aforesaid balance amount. However, no amount was paid to the plaintiffs. 9. In the above facts and circumstances, the plaintiff has filed the above Summary suit for recovery of an amount as mentioned above. 10. This Court in DIVYESH K.KOTHARI VS. AATAM GEMS AND ORS reported in 2006 (2) All M.R. 391 has held that a - 5 - Summary suit on the basis of Jangad note (ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF ENTRUSTMENT) is maintainable. The plaintiff has filed compilation of the original documents. I have perused invoices dated 29.1.2007, 24.2.2007 and 3.3.2007. I have also perused copies of acknowledgment of entrustment dated 20.2.2007 and 3.3.2007. I have also perused the demand letters issued by the plaintiff to the defendant dated 6.10.2007, 25.1.2008 and 7.3.2008. The above said documents do show that the plaintiff has sold, supplied and delivered to the defendant gold ornaments mentioned above. The defendant also never disputed the quality of the said ornaments. The defendant is not entitled to keep the goods and not pay for the same. 11. In the above facts and circumstances coupled with provisions of order XXXVII Rule 2 (3) of C.P.C. I find that the plaintiff has proved its case and is entitled to a decree in terms of prayer clauses (a) and (b) of the suit. 12. Suit is accordingly decreed in terms of prayer clauses (a) and (b) with no order as to costs. R.V.More, J - 6 -