Bangalore District Court M/S Mukatmani Synthetics vs M/S Rimith Apparels on 14 January, 2026 KABC170010892025 IN THE COURT OF LXXXVIII ADDL. CITY CIVIL & SESSIONS JUDGE, (COMMERCIAL COURT), BENGALURU (CCH89) Dated this the 14th day of JANUARY, 2026 Present: SRI. JITHENDRANATH C.S., B.A., LL.M., C/c. LXXXVIII ADDL. CITY CIVIL & SESSIONS JUDGE BENGALURU. Com.O.S.No.438/2025 BETWEEN PLAINTIFF : M/s.MUKATMANI SYNTHETICS, Rep. by the Proprietor, Mr. Suresh Kumar, Having its registered office at 1st Floor, No.7, Sharma Complex, Chickpet, Bangalore, Bengaluru Urban, Karnataka560053. GST NO: 29ABGPJ5750P1Z0 PAN NO: ABGPJ5750P Email: [email protected] (By Sri.Anish P. Bhojani, advocate) Vs DEFENDANT : M/s.RIMITH APPARELS, Through its Proprietor, Mr.Naheep Khan, D.No.319, W17, Lf. Road, Cumbum Theni, Tamil Nadu625516, GSTIN: 33AJRPN0785F1ZZ. (Exparte) Date of Institution : 21.03.2025 2 Com.O.S.No.438/2025 Nature of the suit : Recovery of money Date on which Summary Judgment : 14.01.2026 was pronounced Total Duration : Year/s Month/s Day/s 00 09 24 Digitally signed by JITHENDRANATH S JITHENDRANATH CHELUR S CHELUR Date: 2026.01.17 14:42:20 +0530 (JITHENDRANATH C.S.) C/c. LXXXVIII Addl. City Civil & Sessions Judge, (Commercial Court), Bengaluru. Judgment in a summary suit The plaintiff company filed this summary suit under Order XXXVII Rule 2 read with Section 26 of CPC, seeking a judgment and decree to direct the defendant to pay a sum of Rs.4,00,563/ (Rupees Four Lakh Five Hundred and Sixty Three Only) along with future interest at the rate of 1% per day from the date of legal notice till realization together with costs of the suit. 2. The plaintiff's case in a nutshell is that the plaintiff was involved in the business of trading and wholesale of fabrics. The defendant was a proprietary concern and in the usual course of business, the proprietor of the defendant firm had approached the plaintiff with a request to supply the 3 Com.O.S.No.438/2025 materials on credit basis to its registered office at Theni, Tamil Nadu. Accordingly, the plaintiff had supplied the materials on credit basis to the defendant by maintaining its running account, but the defendant deliberately delayed in making the payments. The defendant had failed to clear the payments on certain credit invoices raised by the plaintiff. According to the plaintiff the defendant was in due of Rs.3,46,680/ for the credit invoices raised during the period 03.10.2022 to 29.07.2023 along with interest at the rate of 24% p.a. Inspite of repeated requests and demands made by the plaintiff the defendant did not come forward to clear the outstanding dues. Therefore, the plaintiff issued a legal notice dated 14.03.2024 calling upon the defendant to clear the outstanding dues for which the defendant had sent a reply letter on 04.04.2024. The suit amount was computed by adding interest amount Rs.97,883/ to the outstanding principal balance amount of Rs.3,46,680/ and thereby arrived at a figure of Rs.4,44,563/. Subsequent to issuance of the legal notice the plaintiff had noticed that the defendant had paid an amount of Rs.44,000/ pending at suspense account of the plaintiff, which was thereafter reconciled. 4 Com.O.S.No.438/2025 Consequently, the legally recoverable amount payable by the defendant stands reduced to Rs.4,00,563/. The plaintiff also initiated PIM proceedings under Section 12A of the Commercial Courts Act, before DLSA in PIM No.935/2023. The defendant did not participate in the proceedings and DLSA issued Non Starter Report on 06.06.2024. Hence, the plaintiff filed this suit for the recovery of money. 3. Having admitted the s