This judgment grants conditional leave to the defendant to defend a summary suit for the price of goods supplied, requiring an interim deposit of Rs. 30,000/- within six weeks to prevent summary decree.
Conditional leave to defend granted upon deposit of Rs. 30,000/- within six weeks; suit transferred to commercial causes list.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION SUMMONS FOR JUDGEMENT NO.295 OF 2009
IN
SUMMARY SUIT NO.512 OF 2009
Satish Mehta .. Plaintiff Versus ARR Industrial Networks .. Defendants
Mr.H.V.Chande for plaintiff Mr.Prashant More for defendant
CORAM : S.C.DHARMADHIKARI, J. DATE : 14h September 2009.
P.C.:
I have perused the affidavits filed by the parties. The claim in the summary suit is on the basis that a purchase order was placed by the defendants on the plaintiffs. That purchase order was accepted. Pursuant thereto, the plaintiffs sold, supplied and delivered the goods worth Rs. 1,93,969/-. The supplies were effected between 6th August 2005 to 6th
2
January 2006. Reliance is placed upon terms and conditions, including payment of interest in default. Relying upon part payment of Rs. 1,40,746/- it is stated by the plaintiff that after giving due credit therefor, there remains due and payable the sum of Rs.51,682/- under Bill No.146 dated 6th January 2006 and Rs.1541/- under Bill No.133 which is of prior date i.e. 22nd December 2005. Since, these amounts were not paid the instant summary suit is filed and the claim is based upon delivery challan and invoices which constitute written contract.
3] On the other hand Mr.More invites my attention to the affidavit in reply and contends that it is not as if the goods have not been accepted. It is upon acceptance of goods and defects were noticed a request was made by the defendants to rectify the same. There was no compliance and since the matter was urgent as far as the defendants’ customers are concerned, the defendants utilised the goods but found that the customers made complaints with regard to the quality of the end product, thereby, defendants sustained loss. In such circumstances, there is no liability to pay and in any event, the defendants have a counter claim which they would make good and substantiate. They have to recover much more
3
than what the invoices claim in the instant suit.
4] Having perused the relevant material and hearing parties, I am satisfied that opportunity will have to be given to defendants to substantiate their pleas, but since prima facie it is not disputed that the goods were sold, supplied and delivered, used and utilised by the defendants, then, they are entitled to defend the suit but on certain terms and conditions. Accordingly, conditional leave to defend the suit is granted to the defendants on they depositing in this Court a sum of Rs. 30,000/- within six weeks from today. The suit in that event shall stand transferred to the list of commercial causes with usual directions for filing written statement/ counter claim, discovery and inspection. If no compliance is made with this condition, decree to follow in favour of plaintiffs. Summons for Judgement is disposed of in these terms with no costs.
(S.C.DHARMADHIKARI, J)
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the defendant is entitled to defend the suit for the supply of defective goods.
The conditions upon which the defendant shall be granted leave to defend.
The sum to be deposited by the defendant to secure the continuance of the suit.
S.C. DHARMADHIKARI
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
