ARJUN BHANDARI Vs. BRUTE ENGINEERING CORPORATION

JUDGEMENT

(1.) UNDISPUTED position is that the defendants had placed an order with the plaintiffs for supply of sand. It is also undisputed that in March 1997, the supply was completed. According to the plaintiffs, two cheques were issued by the defendants, one dated 15th February 1998 for Rs.50,000/- and the other for Rs.45,000/- dated 15th March 1998. Both these cheques were dishonoured when presented to the Bank. Therefore, this suit has been filed by the plaintiffs on the basis of these two dishonoured cheques. So far as the cheques are concerned, the only defence that is raised by the defendants has to be found in paragraph 4(d) of the reply. According to the defendants, these two cheques were issued 'on good faith and towards advance against order'. The learned counsel appearing for defendants stated before me that these two cheques were given in the month of May 1997. Admittedly, in May 1997, the supply was completed. Therefore, there is no question of there being advance against the order because the order was already executed and the supply was made. It is further to be seen here that the defendants rely on two letters dated 28th February 1998. The case of the plaintiffs is that the plaintiffs never received these letters. The defendants have not produced anything which will indicate that these letters have been received by the plaintiffs. Perusal of those letters however shows that according to the defendants, these two cheques, one dated 15th February 1998 and the other dated 15th March 1998 were issued as advance to be adjusted against the bills submitted by the plaintiffs. This statement in these two letters dated 28th February 1998 also belies the defence put up by the defendants that these cheques were given towards advance against order. Even according to the defendants, these cheques were to be encashed by the plaintiffs for the payment of their bills. It is further pertinent to note here that according to the defendants, the letters were written on 28th February 1998 and there is a request made in the letter that the plaintiffs should return the cheque dated 15th February 1998. Taking overall view of the matter therefore, it appears that the defence put up by the defendants has no substance and it has been put up by the defendants because they are not in a position to pay the amounts. I had also put up to the learned counsel for defendants that as the cheques have been issued, he should deposit the amount of cheques in the Court, but the learned counsel expressed his inability to make any statement to that effect. Therefore, in my opinion, summons for judgment deserves to be granted. It is according granted. Suit is decreed in terms of the prayer clause of the suit. Refund of court fees as per rules.

(2.) PARTIES to act on the copy of this order duly authenticated by the Associate / Personal Secretary as true copy. Certified copy expedited.