In a recent landmark judgement by the Delhi High Court, the case of Sukra Logistics Private Limited vs. the Plaintiff was thoroughly examined. The court upheld the validity of the documents presented and rendered the decision in favor of Sukra Logistics Private Limited. The appeal filed was deemed unmerited, leading to the dismissal of the case. Read on to know more about this significant ruling in commercial law.
Facts
- The plaintiff’s claim was based on 13 invoices supported by the Commercial Courts Act, 2015.
- The defendants did not file their statement within the maximum time limit of 120 days.
- The plaintiff’s claim amount was ₹10,39,513/-.
- The plaintiff demanded payment through a legal notice dated 23.02.2021.
- Interest at the rate of 12% per annum was claimed from the date of filing the suit.
- An application for amendment of the plaint was filed by the plaintiff.
- The plaintiff also claimed interest at the rate of 24% per annum from the date of the invoice.
- The statement of accounts was supported by a certificate under Section 65B of the Evidence Act.
- Despite opportunities given, defendants did not file their written statement or admission/denial of documents.
- The case was re-listed several times for completion of pleadings.
Arguments
- All orders were procured through Sukra Logistics Private Limited.
- Defendants were not liable to pay for the services rendered.
- Plaintiff’s claim was based on correspondence and invoices from Sukra Logistics Private Limited.
- Plaintiff sued Sukra Logistics, a firm, and its partners.
- Decision of the Commercial Court to render the judgment and decree in favor of defendants was justified.
Analysis
- Defendants’ counsel confined submissions to paragraph 2 of the appeal which was deemed unsubstantiated by the court.
- Defendants claimed that the Commercial Suit was filed by an authorized representative of the respondent’s company against the appellant based on invoices addressed to Sukra Logistics, not a Private Limited Company.
- Legal notice was sent to Sukra Logistics and its partners, defendant nos.2 and 3.
- Defendant no.1 firm (Sukra Logistics) was GST registered, and plaintiff presented documents from the GST department as evidence.
- Defendants did not challenge the documents or allegations in the plaint despite opportunities to do so.
- Invoices presented by the plaintiff were addressed to Sukra Logistics, not a Private Company as claimed by the defendants.
- The contention is deemed unmerited and contrary to the documents on record.
- The judgement thoroughly examines the documents presented.
- Evidence on record supports the decision made by the court.
- The judgement upholds the validity of the documents in question.
Decision
- The appeal is deemed unmerited
- The appeal is dismissed
Case Title: SUKRA LOGISTICES & ORS. Vs. EMU LINES PVT. LTD (2024:DHC:3810-DB)
Case Number: RFA(COMM)-183/2023
