CHINA GARDEN RESTAURANT Vs. VENUS INDUSTRIES

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present regular second appeal has been preferred by the appellant to challenge the legality and correctness of a judgment dated 10.05.2016 of learned Additional District Judge in RCA No.11/2015 whereby the findings recorded by the learned Senior Civil Judge in Suit No.128/2012 (M/S Venus Industries vs. China Garden Restaurant) were endorsed. The appeal is contested by the respondent.

(2.) I have heard the learned counsel for the appellant and have examined the file. Appellant's counsel urged that the impugned judgment cannot be sustained as the evidence adduced by the appellant before the Trial Court was not appreciated in its true perspective. The respondent miserably failed to produce on record books of accounts to establish that the goods were ever delivered to the appellant. It was admitted by the respondent that advance payment of Rs. 50,000/- was given to him for the supply of goods which he failed to comply. Consequently, counter-claim for the recovery of Rs. 50,000/- was filed by the appellant before the trial court. There was no cogent document on record to show if the goods were ever received by the appellant or his representative. Ledger account of the appellant (Ex.DW-2/2) only showed payment against invoice dated 06.04.2010. There was no basis for the trial court to hold and conclude that the other three invoices which did not find mention in Ex.DW-2/2 stood admitted by the appellant and the goods were supplied against the said invoices. The respondent was unable to show if any of the invoices had signatures of the appellant's representative. The invoices relied upon by the respondent were self-created, false and fabricated documents.

(3.) Reliance has been placed by the appellant on Kurian Chacko vs.Varkey Ouseph, 1969 AIR(Ker) 316; Vinod Kumar vs. Gangadhar, 2015 1 SCC 391; Shasidhar & Ors. vs. Ashwini Uma Mathad & Anr., 2015 11 SCC 269 and Kusum Kund Durga vs. Kalra Papers (P) Ltd., 2013 1 AD(Del) 532.