Bangalore District Court Mysore Paper Mills Limited vs M/S Amarjyothi Paper Co on 27 September, 2025 KABC170021742024 IN THE COURT OF LXXXIII ADDL. CITY CIVIL & SESSIONS JUDGE, COMMERCIAL COURT, BENGALURU (CCH84) Present: Sri S. Sudindranath, LL.M., M.B.L., LXXXIII ADDL. CITY CIVIL & SESSIONS JUDGE BENGALURU. COM.O.S.No.1090/2024 Dated on this 27th day of September 2025 Plaintiff/s M/S. MYSORE PAPER MILLS LIMITED Office at No.32, 5th Floor, D Devraj Urs Road, (Race Course Road), Bengaluru560 001. (By Sri Santhosh M, Advocate) // versus // Defendant/s M/S AMARJYOTHI PAPER CO. No.125/9/1, Balaji Complex Sultanpet, Bengaluru560 053. (By Sri C.Vijaya Kumar, Advocate) Date of Institution of suit : 08082024 Nature of the suit : Recovery of money Date of commencement of : 15032025 recording of the evidence Date on which the : 27092025 Judgment was pronounced. : Year/s Month/s Day/s Total duration 01 01 19 2 CT 1390_Com.O.S.No.10902024_Judgment.doc KABC170021742024 JUDGMENT This is a suit filed by the plaintiff company against defendant company for recovery of total sum of Rs. 82,69,287 along with interest towards material supplied. 2. The plaint averments in brief are that, the plaintiff is in the business of manufacture and sale of paper and paper products and has been supplying material to the defendant and also to third parties on the basis of booking made by the defendant on credit basis under running ledger account. Towards material supplied directly to the defendant from 1 42015 to 3132016 and from 142016 to 1572016 the balance pending amount payable by the defendant is Rs. 73,08,332. Apart from this, as a dealer, the defendant has booked products for supply to various third parties and in respect of such supply to third parties on booking made by the defendant for the period from 142009 to 3132012 the outstanding balance payable is Rs. 9,60,955. In spite of reminders and issuance of legal notice, defendant has not paid the above sums. Hence, for recovery of the total sum of Rs. 82,69,287 along with interest, the present suit is filed. 3 CT 1390_Com.O.S.No.10902024_Judgment.doc KABC170021742024 3. On issuance of suit summons to the defendant, suit summons by RPAD was duly served and in response to the suit summons, defendant has entered appearance through Counsel. Thereafter, on the date fixed for filing of written statement, since there was no representation for defendant, written statement of defendant was taken as not filed. Thereafter, defendant filed IA No. 3 seeking leave to file written statement which was allowed subject to cost of Rs. 1,000. However, in spite of sufficient opportunity granted, defendant failed to pay the said cost and therefore written statement was discarded by orders dated 1062025. 4. Thereafter, in the ex parte evidence, the representative of the plaintiff is examined as PW1 and got marked Ex. P1 to P18. 5. The defendant has not crossexamined PW1 and since written statement is discarded, there is also no rebuttal evidence adduced by the defendant. 6. After closure of evidence, I have heard the arguments of counsel for plaintiff and perused the records of the case. 4 CT 1390_Com.O.S.No.10902024_Judgment.doc KABC170021742024 7. In this case, since written statement of defendant was discarded, issues are not framed and therefore at this stage, the following point is framed for consideration; Whether the plaintiff is entitled to recover sum of Rs. 82,69,287 which consists of sum of Rs. 73,08,332 for material directly supplied to the defendant and Rs. 9,60,955 towards materials supplied to third parties on the booking of the defendant, along with interest at 18% per annum from due date till date of realization? 8. My answer to the above point is in the negative for the following: REASONS. 9. The case of the plaintiff in brief