In this company petition regarding payment of dues, the court dismissed the petition with observations that the petitioner must adopt suitable proceedings to establish the balance claim.
No order as to costs.
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.
902-CP226-2012.DOC
Vishal
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION COMPANY PETITION NO.226 OF 2012
Mehul Indukumar Parekh …Petitioner
Versus
M/s.Rohini Industrial Electricals Ltd..Respondent
Mr.N.M.Shah for the Petitioner.
Mr.Z. Andhyarujina alw M/s.Shreya Gupta i/b.Bharucha &
Partners for the Respondent.
CORAM: G.S. PATEL, J DATED: MARCH 06, 2014
PC:-
1.The petitioner claims that M/s.Rohini Industrial Electricals
Limited (“the Company”) is indebted to it in an amount of
Rs.5,69,319/- plus interest of Rs.1,58,850/-.
2.The petitioner’s claim arises under various invoices.
According to the petitioner, it sold, supplied and delivered various
electrical and hardware goods to the Company under these
invoices. The total value of these invoices was Rs.7,28,169/-.
1 of 3
902-CP226-2012.DOC
3.The Company made part payment of Rs.3,82,552/-. The
rest, the petitioner claims, has remained unpaid despite the service
of a statutory notice.
4.The Company’s defence in its reply to the statutory notice as
also in the affidavit in reply, is that it has not been possible to
reconcile the petitioner’s claim with the Company’s records and
accounts.
5.After this petition was taken up for hearing at the stage of
admission, parties did make several attempts at a resolution of the
disputes of the principal amount of Rs.5,69,319/-. The Company
has paid the petitioner a sum of Rs.3,82,552/-. The remaining
amount of Rs.3,45,617/- is disputed on the basis that the Company
can find no record in its own documents, systems and accounts in
relation to this remaining balance claimed. The petitioner’s
invoices that relate to the remainder also did not appear to bear
confirmation of receipt from the Company.
6.This is merely an observation on the state of the record. It is
not an assessment on merits or a finding that the petitioner, did not,
in fact, deliver the goods under those remaining invoices to the
Company.
7.In my view, the petitioner will need to adopt suitable
proceedings to establish its claim for the balance amount of
Rs.3,45,617/-. It may need to lead evidence. All contentions of both
parties in this regard are expressly kept open. The petitioner is at
liberty to adopt such proceedings as it deems fit in this behalf.
2 of 3
902-CP226-2012.DOC
8.The petition, is, accordingly dismissed with these
observations. There will be no order as to costs.
(G. S. PATEL, J.)
3 of 3
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the petitioner can proceed for the balance claimed without filed evidence substantiating the undisputed portion of invoices.
Mehul Indukumar Parekh
M/s. Rohini Industrial Electricals Ltd.
G. S. Patel
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court