Home Case Index All Cases Indian Laws Indian Laws + HC Indian Laws - 2018 (2) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2018 (2) TMI 1939 - HC - Indian LawsSuit for recovery of principal amount - Whether the machinery supplied by the Plaintiff was of inferior quality as claimed by the Defendants? If so, what was its effect? - Whether the Plaintiff agreed to receive the amount due to the Plaintiff in instalments without interest as claimed by the Defendants? - HELD THAT:- The plaintiff, on the evidence led, has proved sale and supply of machines of the total value of ₹ 1,56,57,000/- to the defendant No. 1 and sale, supply and delivery whereof is supported by 'C Form under the erstwhile Sales Tax law issued by the defendant No. 1 to the plaintiff. It is also not in dispute that the defendant No. 1 has paid only a sum of ₹ 53,07,000/- leaving the balance of ₹ 1,03,50,000/-. The Counsel for defendants No. 1 to 3 has drawn attention to the pleas taken in the written statement and on which issues aforesaid were framed but which as aforesaid are found to have been proved in favour of the plaintiff. Though the defendants took a plea of the machinery being of inferior quality and of an Agreement with the plaintiff of payment of price thereof in instalments, but have utterly failed to prove the same and the said pleas are found to be falsified from the contemporaneous conduct of issuance of cheques and confirmation of balance - the issues decided in favour of the plaintiff and against the defendants. Whether the Defendants No. 2 to 4 are jointly or severally liable to pay the amount? - HELD THAT:- A company, being a juristic entity, has to necessarily act through natural persons and we are still far from the day when such juristic entities, with the assistance of Artificial Intelligence will enter into contracts without acting through natural persons. Thus, merely because a natural person has acted on behalf of a juristic entity like a company will not make such natural person personally liable for the debts of such juristic entity - decided against the plaintiff and in favour of the defendant No. 2 to 4. Quantum of interest - HELD THAT:- It is however proved and not disputed that the invoices contained a clause for payment of interest at the said rate and no protest was made with respect thereto and in fact the price was sought to be paid by cheques which were dishonoured - for the pre-suit period, the plaintiff is entitled to the contractual rate of interest for the reason of the transaction between the parties being a 'commercial' one. However considering the prevalent rates of interest paid on fixed deposits in the contemporaneous time, the plaintiff is found entitled to future interest at 9% per annum - the claim of the plaintiff for interest at 24% per annum can only be w.e.f. 1st April 2012 till the date of institution of the suit. A decree is accordingly passed in favour of the plaintiff and against the defendant No. 1 only, for recovery of ₹ 1,03,50,000/- with interest at 24% per annum from 1st April, 2012 till the date of institution of the suit and at 9% per annum w.e.f. the date of institution of the suit till the date of realisation/payment - The suit, insofar as against the defendants No. 2 to 4 is dismissed.
|