ZODIAC CLOTHING COMPANY Vs. R. J. FASHIONS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The suit of the present appellant - Company in its capacity as a plaintiff against the present respondents arraigning them as defendants for recovery of a sum of Rs.5,10,799-17 came to be dismissed by the Court of the XXVI Additional City Civil Judge at Mayohall, Bangalore (CCH-20) (hereinafter for brevity referred to as "Trial Court") by its judgment and decree dated 01-02-2011 in O.S.No.15674/2004. It is against the said judgment and decree, the plaintiff - Company has preferred this appeal.

(2.) The summary of the case of the plaintiff - Company in the Trial Court was that, it is a Company manufacturing ready-made garments and accessories. Another Company by name M/s. Mayfair Limited had supplied certain goods to the defendant No.1 - M/s. R.J. Fashions represented by its partners who are defendant Nos. 2 to 4. At the relevant point of time, the defendants were due in a sum of Rs.2,99,457-45 to the said M/s. Mayfair Limited. Subsequently, the said M/s. Mayfair Limited under Company Petition No.326/2003 before this Hon'ble High Court was amalgamated with the present appellant - Company under Sections 391 and 394 of the Companies Act, as such, all the assets and liabilities and entitlement of the said Company - M/s. Mayfair Limited came to be converted in the name of M/s Zodiac Clothing Company Limited, which is the appellant (plaintiff - Company) herein.

(3.) In response to the summons received by them, the defendants 1 to 4 appeared through their counsel and filed their common Written Statement. In the said Written Statement, though the defendants submitted that they had transactions with M/s. Mayfair Limited, but, denied that they are in any manner, due in a sum of Rs.2,99,457-45 to the said Company. On the other hand, they contended that at different points of time, the defendant No.1 - firm has made payment to M/s. Mayfair Limited. They have given the details of the Demand Draft number and the amounts paid by them to the said M/s. Mayfair Limited and stating that they have made an excess payment than what was due to M/s. Mayfair Limited at the relevant time, the defendants had prayed for dismissal of the suit.