- 1 - 7.sj.308.10 ss.673.20 skt IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION SUMMONS FOR JUDGMENT NO. 308 OF 2010 IN SUMMARY SUIT NO. 673 OF 2010 Pravin H. Shah ..Plaintiff -Versus- Rajesh Laxmichand Udeshi @ Bhatia ..Defendant .......... Ms.Aditi Chavan i/b Ashwin Ankhad & Associates for the Plaintiff. Mr.Ramesh Jain i/b Ramesh Jain & Kusum Jain for the Defendant. .......... CORAM : S.J. VAZIFDAR, J. DATE : 20TH OCTOBER 2011. P.C. 1 The suit is filed to recover an amount of Rs. 67,10,000/- together with interest at 12% p.a. on the principle sum of Rs.61,00,000/-. The parties had entered into a Memorandum of Understanding (for short ‘MOU’) under which the defendant was to sell to the plaintiff a flat for consideration of Rs.8.46 crores. The defendant represented that he along with his father and brother were the owners of the flat and that he had authority to enter into the MOU. - 2 - 7.sj.308.10 ss.673.20 2 The plaintiff paid an aggregate sum of Rs.61,00,000/-. After the MOU was executed, the defendant’s father and brother did not agree to the MOU being implemented. They denied the defendants’ authority to do so. It is obviously in these circumstances that the defendants issued three cheques for a sum of Rs.61,00,000/- towards repayment of the amounts paid by the plaintiff to the defendant as aforesaid. The cheques were, however, dishonoured when presented. The amounts which were paid by the plaintiff, were received by the defendant. 3 The defence on merits is that the dishonoured cheques issued by the defendant were in respect of certain other transactions entered into between the parties regarding the sale and purchase of diamonds. There is nothing whatsoever indicating any such transaction in respect whereof the dishonoured cheques were issued. It is not even the defence that in respect of those alleged transactions, the payments were subsequently made. 4 The only other contention is that interest cannot be claimed from 6th April 2009 to 29th April 2009 as the said amounts were advanced only on 29th April 2009. This appears to be correct. Thus, apart from this, there is, no defence to the suit. - 3 - 7.sj.308.10 ss.673.20 5 In the circumstances, the summons for judgment is made absolute and the suit is decreed in the sum of Rs.61,00,000/- together with interest thereon at 12% p.a. from 29th April 2009 till payment and/or realization. Costs to be quantified as per rules. Refund, if any, as per Rules. -