LAWS(DLH)-1995-11-18

SUCHETA ENGINEERING CO Vs. APITRON INDIA

Decided On November 01, 1995
SUCHETA ENGINIRING COMPANY Appellant
V/S
APITRON INDIA Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The plaintiff has filed this suit against the defendants for the recovery of Rs-1,88,943.42 paise on the allegations that the plaintiff No. 2 being the sole proprietor of plaintiff No. I had dealings with the defendants I to3 and had been supplying to the said defendants pressure feed type bleeching doser chlorinetor, chlorine tablets, chlorine liquid and chlorine testing kit and discount at the rates of 25% and 30% were being given as per agreement arrived at between the parties. It is stated that between the period 24th September, 1986 to 21st August, 1987, the plaintiffs had supplied goods of the total value of Rs. 64,279.50 paise to the defendants vide bills mentioned in paragraph 3 of the plaint. It is also stated that besides the suit amount, the plaintiff had also advanced a total sum of Rs. 41,900.00 to the defendants by way of cash or traveller cheques to enable the defendants to submit tenders with the authorities on behalf of the plaintiffs. It is further stated that neither the amount of Rs. 64,279.50 paise being the value of the goods nor the sum of Rs. 41,900.00 which had been advanced in cash or by traveller cheques by the plaintiff to the defendants, has been paid by the defendants. Plaintiffs have, therefore, claimed this amount along with interest at the rate of 18% per annum which, according to them, was the market rate of interet and the plaintiffs are entitled to claim the same as per market usage and custom.

(2.) The defendant No. 4 is a transport company through whom the goods were sent. It has not been disclosed as to how the said defendant is a necessary party and on an application having been made by the said defendant, this Court vide an order dated 23rd March, 1992, had deleted the name of defendant No. 4 from the array of defendants.

(3.) Defendants 1 to 3, even after service, did not appear and by order dated 23rd September, 1992, they were proceeded ex parte. Ex parte evidence has been led by means of affidavit and documents Ex.PW-l/l to PW-1 /29 have been proved on record.