Capital Infrastructure India D80, Anand Niketan, New Delhi110021 .......Defendant Date of institution : 25.09.2019 Date of reserving judgment : 26.02.2024 Date of pronouncement : 20.03.2024 JUDGMENT 1. The present suit for recovery of Rs. 18,37,284/ along with interest has been filed by the plaintiff against the defendant. 2. Briefly stated the facts of the case are that the plaintiff is a company incorporated under the Companies Act 1956 and is inter alia engaged in post tensioning work in the high rise buildings, flyovers etc. The defendant is a builder engaged in taking contract of buildings for companies/individuals etc. Sh. Bharat Bhushan, Regional Manager is authorized representative CS (COMM.) 619/2019 Page 1 of 12 of the plaintiff to institute the present suit in terms of the board resolution. 3. It has been further averred that the defendant approached the plaintiff for post tensioning work at Slab Mall, Rohini, New Delhi. The defendant placed work order with the plaintiff for the said job on 18.03.2017 which was duly accepted and executed by the plaintiff to the satisfaction of the defendant. The plaintiff raised bills from time to time on the defendant with the work progress and the defendant made the payment against the bills raised for Rs. 81,81,682/ leaving a balance outstanding of Rs.14,81,682/ as on 01.03.2018. The plaintiff made innumerable request to the defendant for making the balance payment as stated in various emails etc. 4. It has been further averred that the plaintiff was left with no other option but to send a legal notice dated 11.05.2019 which was duly received on 13.05.2019 as per post track report demanding therein Rs.14,81,682/ together with interest @ 24% p.a. till payment from the date payment became due within 14 days from the date of receipt of the notice but the defendant opted not to reply the legal notice inspite of service. Under the scenario, the plaintiff was left with no other option but to institute the present suit. On these premise, the present suit has been filed by the plaintiff against the defendant. 5. Summons of the suit was issued to the defendant who appeared before this court on 26.11.2019. Written statement was filed on CS (COMM.) 619/2019 Page 2 of 12 behalf of the defendant on 30.09.2020 but since the same was not filed within the stipulated period, the court vide order dated 04.11.2020 struck off the defence of the defendant and the written statement filed by the defendant was deemed to be struck off the pleadings. There is nothing on record to show that the defendant has challenged order dated 04.11.2020 before the Superior Court and thus, the said order has attained finality. 6. In order to prove its case, on 10.03.2021 the plaintiff examined Sh. Bharat Bhushan, authorized representative of the plaintiff as PW1 who tendered his examination in chief by way of affidavit Ex. PW1/A which is on the line of the averments mentioned in the plaint. PW1 has also relied upon documents exhibited as Ex. PW1/1 to Ex. PW1/6. The cross examination of this witness was deferred on the request of the defendant. The court vide order dated 20.09.2021 observed that none has been appearing for the defendant for the last so many dates and accordingly, the defendant was proceeded exparte. On the said date, PW1 Sh. Bharat Bhushan was discharged and vide separate statement, the plaintiff closed its evidence. 7. Perusal of the record shows that the defendant moved an application under Order 9 Rule 7 CPC and Order 18 Rule 17 CPC for setting aside of exparte order dated 20.09.2021 which was allowed by the court vide order dated 09.12.2021 as per the terms mentioned in the said order and the defendant was allowed to cross examine of PW1 Sh. Bharat Bhushan. CS (COMM.) 619/2019 Page 3 of 12 Thereafter, the defendant moved an application under Section 151 CPC read with Order 8 Rule 1 CPC seeking recall of order dated 04.11.2020 of striking off the defence of the defendant and seeking condona