Harish Dhalla vs Rajesh Luthra

Sr no,Date,Cheque No,Amount in Rs

i.,22.09.2010,970265,"10,00,000.00

ii.,21.10.2010,970266,"10,00,000.00

iii.,25.01.2011,970270,"10,00,000.00

iv.,04.03.2011,RTGS,"10,00,000.00

v.,28.04.2011,023819,"10,00,000.00

vi.,10.08.2011,061900,"10,00,000.00

vii.,01.10.2011,RTGS,"10,00,000.00

viii.,12.01.2012,204534,"10,00,000.00

ix.,10.04.2013,526089,"3,85,000.00

x.,29.04.2013,RTGS,"5,00,000.00

xi.,16.07.2013,RTGS,"4,01,000.00

the learned predecessor of this Court:- “i. Whether the plaintiff is entitled to the relief claimed?,,,

ii. Reliefâ€​,,,

The plaintiff has filed its evidence by way of affidavit of Mr. Harish Dhalla (PW1) and Ms. Yogita, Sr. Assistant, Department of Trades & Taxes,",,,

Vyapar Bhawan (PW2).,,,

Mr. Harish Dhalla (PW1) has proved amongst others, the following documents: -",,,

(i) Invoices issued by the plaintiff to the defendant, as mentioned in para 3 and exhibited as Ex. PW1/1 to Ex. PW1/8.",,,

(ii) Statements of accounts of the defendant exhibited as Ex. PW1/9.,,,

(iii) Confirmation of the accounts signed by the defendant exhibited as Ex. PW1/11 to Ex. PW1/12.,,,

(iv) Legal notice dated 08th June, 2015 exhibited as Ex. PW1/13 sent by the plaintiff to the defendant.",,,

(v) Reply to the legal notice sent by the defendant to the plaintiff dated 23rd June, 2015 exhibited as Ex. PW1/16.",,,

Ms. Yogita, Sr. Assistant, Department of Trades & Taxes, Vyapar Bhawan (PW2) has proved the Purchase Return of the firm of the plaintiff",,,

and the same is exhibited as Ex. PW2/1 (Colly).,,,

The defendant cross examined the PW1 before the Joint Registrar on 13th October, 2017. However, the defendant did not appear before the Joint",,,

Registrar either on 20th July, 2018 or 19th September, 2018. Consequently, vide order dated 03rd October, 2018, he was proceeded ex-parte.",,,

Having perused the paper book, this Court finds that the plaintiff has proved his invoices, statement of accounts and legal notice. The plaintiff has",,,

also proved the confirmation of his accounts. 15.However, the defendant has not led any evidence to prove his defence that he had returned the",,,

jewellery in question vide three invoices dated 08th April, 2015, 18th April, 2015 and 30th April, 2015. It is pertinent to mention that the defence of",,,

return of jewellery items has not even been taken by the defendant in his reply dated 23rd June, 2015 to the plaintiff’s legal notice. Consequently,",,,

the defence of the defendant is not reflected in the contemporaneous correspondence.,,,

Accordingly, the present suit is decreed in favour of the plaintiff and against the defendant for a sum of Rs.1,05,96,187/- (Rupees One Crore Five",,,

Lacs Ninety-Six Thousand One Hundred Eighty-Seven Only) along with interest pendente lite and future @ 8% per annum. This Court may mention,,,

that it is awarding the interest @ 8% per annum as that is the normal rate at which the banks are lending monies now-a-days.,,,

Registry is directed to prepare a decree sheet accordingly.,,,