Delhi District Court Shiv Bhola Filaments Pvt Ltd vs Geeta Jain on 16 July, 2025 ~1~ In the court of Sh. Umed Singh Grewal, District Judge Commercial Court02, North District Rohini Courts, Delhi. CS (Comm) No.312/2023 In the matter of: M/s Shiv Bhola Filaments Pvt. Ltd. Through Authorised Signatory ShriChaitanya Aggarwal C481482, DSIDC Narela Industrial Area, Delhi110040 Mob. No.9810669760 Email Id:[email protected]. ..... Plaintiff Vs Smt. Geeta Jain Proprietor of Paras Footwear RZ125A, Kh.No.92/24/1/1 Gali No.9 Sadh Nagar 2 Road South West Delhi110045 Mob No.9212463780 ....... Defendant Date of Institution : 26.05.2023 Date of final arguments concluded : 09.07.2025 Date of pronouncement of order : 16.07.2025 Present : Shri Ashok Kumar Gupta and Ms. Seema Gupta, Counsel for plaintiff. Shri Sanjeev, Counsel for defendant. Digitally signed UMED by UMED SINGH CS (COMM) No.312/23 SINGH Date: 2025.07.16 Jain Shiv Bhola Filaments Pvt. Ltd Vs Geeta 16:34:29 +0530 Page No.1 to 9 ~2~ JUDGMENT: 1. This is an ordinary suit for recovery of Rs.6,29,332/ with pendentlite and future interest and cost. 2. The plaintiff, a company registered under Indian Companies Act, 1956, manufactures and supplies Polyster Texturized Yarn and Narrow Woven Fabrics 'Niwar" and has authorised Shri Chaitanya Aggarwal, vide board resolution dated 29.11.2022, to pursue the case against Geeta Jain who used to buy goods from it on credit basis through one Shri Vinod Jain since 03.07.2020. On the assurance of the defendant that she would pay on time for the goods purchased on credit, the plaintiff had started supplying goods to her for which it used to maintain current running non mutual account in which the value of supplied goods used to be mentioned in the column of debit and payment made by defendant used to be mentioned in the credit column. She was supplied goods of Rs.4,70,210/ to the defendant from 03.07.2020 to 17.07.2021 for which she made payment of only Rs.21,130/ on 03.07.2020 leaving behind balance amount of Rs.4,49,080/. The plaintiff is registered under MSE Act and also whose Sections 15, 16 & 17 make defendant liable to pay compound interest with monthly rest at three times of the bank rate notified by RBI and such notified rate as on 08.02.2023 was 6.75% per annum and hence, the defendant is liable to pay compound interest at the rate of UMED Digitally signed by UMED SINGH CS (COMM) No.312/23 Shiv Bhola Filaments Pvt. Ltd Vs Geeta Jain 2025.07.16 Date: SINGH Page No.216:34:45 to 9 +0530 ~3~ 20.25% from 17.07.2021 i.e. from the last date of purchase till the date of filing the suit which comes out to Rs.8,80,252/. So, the defendant is liable to pay Rs.6,29,332/ in all. 3. In written statement, the defendant took the plea that the plaintiff has concealed the material fact that the goods supplied by it were defective and it had assured to take them back which it did not take and instead filed the present suit signed by one Shri Chaitanya Aggarwal in his personal capacity as the stamp of the company has not been affixed on plaint as well as vakalatnama. The vakalatnama has also signed by him in his personal capacity and not as AR. 4. Following issues were framed on 19.02.2024: i. Whether the plaintiff is entitled to an amount of Rs.6,29,332/ from the defendant as prayed for? OPP ii. Whether the plaintiff is entitled to any interest from the defendant? If so, at what rate and for which period?OPP iii. Relief. 5. For substantiating the case, the plaintiff examined its AR Shri Chaitanya Aggarwal, AR as PW1 who repeated the contents of his and tendered his affidavit in evidence Ex.PW1/A and relied upon following documents: Digitally signed