PAWAN KUMAR TODI Vs. ANKIT SARDA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Wp(C) No.20 of 2017 and WP(C) No.21 of 2017 filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, are being disposed of by this common Judgment. They arise out of the impugned Orders of the learned District Judge, East Sikkim at Gangtok, dated 05-12- 2016, in Money Suit No.10 of 2015 [Mr. Ankit Sarda vs. Pawan Kumar Todi and Order dated 05-12-2016 passed in Money Suit No.9 of 2015 [Mr. Ankit Sarda vs. Pawan Kumar Todi (HUF)], respectively.

(2.) The Petitioner's case, in WP(C) No.21 of 2017, is that, he had filed a Suit for recovery of money against the Respondent, before the Learned 7th Bench of the City Civil Court, at Kolkata, on 16-04-2015, being Money Suit No.220 of 2015. The facts enumerated therein were that sometime in November 2012, the Respondent had approached the Petitioner to be a franchisee of the Petitioner's Company, in Siliguri, West Bengal. On the basis of the agreed terms, the Respondent advanced some money to the Petitioner, who in turn supplied some computers, servers and peripherals worth Rs.9,75,000/- (Rupees nine lakhs and seventyfive thousand) only, to the Respondent at the Respondent's Siliguri Office, which however closed down after a few months. Therefore, the Petitioner sought recovery of Rs.1,03,026/- (Rupees one lakh, three thousand and twenty six) only, being the difference in the value of goods supplied and the advance made by the Respondent. Instead, two and half months' later, the Respondent filed a Money Suit against the Petitioner, being Money Suit No.09 of 2015, in the Court of the Learned District Judge, East Sikkim, at Gangtok, on 06-07-2015 seeking recovery of a sum of Rs.10,11,044/- (Rupees ten lakhs, eleven thousand and forty-four) only, from the Petitioner.

(3.) In WP(C) No. 20 of 2017, it was averred that the supply of computers and peripherals by the Petitioner to the Respondent amounted to Rs.20,40,000/- (Rupees twenty lakhs and forty thousand) only, hence the Petitioner sought recovery of an amount of Rs.94,200/- (Rupees ninety-four thousand and two hundred) only, from the Respondent as the difference between the supplies and the money advanced by the Respondent. The Respondent for this part filed Money Suit No. 10/2015 in the Court of the learned District Judge, East Sikkim, on 6-7-2015, seeking recovery of an amount of Rs.22,74,914/- (Rupees twenty-two lakhs, seventy-four thousand, nine-hundred and fourteen) only, from the Petitioner herein alleging that he had advanced loan to the Petitioner.