VEE VEDIONICS PVT LTD Vs. ROHIT POLYMERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE present appeal arises out of the impugned judgment and decree dated 27. 02. 1997 passed by the learned ADJ in a suit for recovery of Rs. 2,09,569. 40 paise alongwith interest filed by the respondent, a proprietorship firm (plaintiff in the court below) against the appellants (defendants in the court below) towards value of the goods supplied.

(2.) THE case of the respondent, as set out in the plaint was that the respondent was dealing in all kinds of plastic raw materials, which the appellants were purchasing against payment as well as on credit. The respondent averred that it had been maintaining a regular account in respect of the said purchases made by the appellants, which become irregular. As a result, an amount of Rs. 1,74,641. 20 paise was stated to be outstanding against the appellants since 04. 04. 1995. It was the case of the respondent that despite repeated requests, the appellants did not release the balance payment and instead, informed the respondent that they could not make the payment due to liquidity crisis and assured that the same would be cleared soon. As despite repeated requests, the respondent did not receive any payment, a legal notice dated 11. 09. 1995 was served upon the appellants, both by Registered AD Post as also under Postal Certificate. However, the legal notice was neither replied to nor any payment released by the appellants, thus compelling the respondent to institute the present suit on 07. 02. 1996.

(3.) THE aforesaid suit was contested by the appellants, who filed a written statement wherein, it was stated that Shri Bhanwar Lal Doshi, proprietor of the respondent firm was also the proprietor of another firm by the name of M/s D. R. Plastics, which had dealings with the appellants and was supplying the same material to them. The appellants averred that an excess payment of Rs. 1,15,955/- was made by them to M/s D. R. Plastics, the sister concern, but the said amount was liable to be returned as the material supplied was inferior. The excess amount was sought to be adjusted by the appellants in the account of the respondent herein. The receipt of the legal notice was denied by the appellants and it was stated that the amount liable to be adjusted from the account of M/s D. R. Plastics, the sister concern of the respondent firm, may be transferred to the account of the respondent and that after adjusting the said amount, nothing would be due or payable to the respondent. An objection with regard to territorial jurisdiction of the Delhi court to entertain the suit filed by the respondent was also raised on behalf of the appellants.