TIN BOX Vs. GOM INDUSTRIES LTD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal had impugned the judgment and decree dated 17.1.2007 which endorsed the finding of the trial judge dated 25.8.2004 whereby the suit filed by the plaintiff (under Order XXXVII of the Code of Civil Procedure) seeking recovery of Rs.1,69,238.00 had been decreed; the application filed by the defendant seeking leave to defend had been dismissed.

(2.) PLAINTIFF had filed the aforenoted suit under the provisions of XXXVII of the Code of Civil Procedure (hereinafter referred to as � 1/2the Code?). He was supplying goods to the defendant against invoices. A running account was maintained; defendant failed to make the payments despite reminders and even after having confirmed the balance as on 31.03.1996. The statement of account from the ledger of the plaintiff maintaining the account of the defendant company had been filed along with the plaint. On 31.7.1998 the suit had been decreed as the defendant had failed to appear in spite of service. On his application under Order 9 Rule 13 of the Code the ex parte decree was set aside. Leave to defend was filed by the defendant. The letter dated 08.2.1996 sent by the defendant to the defendant had confirmed the balance of Rs.1,28,350.00 as on 31.03.1996. This was in conformity with the statement of account filed by the plaintiff. The three following defences were raised by the defendant in his application seeking leave to defend: i. entry of Rs.25,086.00 against invoice no.0061 dated 23.3.1996 ii. Rs.10,910.00 iii. Rs.60,000.00

(3.) THIS was affirmed in first appeal.