9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (3) TMI 962X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ach the defendant on various occasions demanding the outstanding amount but the defendant never repaid the said amount to the plaintiff company. The defendant through an e-mail dated 13th November, 2011 acknowledged the sum due and also promised to refund an initial amount of ₹ 4,20,00,000/- by January, 2012 to the plaintiff company. When the defendant on various occasion failed to pay the amount due to the plaintiff company, the plaintiff company on 31st March, 2014 through its advocate filed a Civil Suit in this Court with regard to the outstanding claim of the plaintiff. It is to be noted that the suit is well within the period of limitation. It is to be noted that the defendant has entered appearance but chosen not to file any ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e plaintiff that on 22nd October, 2010 the defendant approached the plaintiff Company and offered to supply iron ore fines. Pursuant to the negotiations held between the plaintiff company and the defendant it was decided that the plaintiff company will buy an aggregate supply of 92,000 Metric Tonnes (MT) of iron ore fines at rates varying between ₹ 1,575/- to ₹ 2,800/- Per Metric Tonnes (PMT) between the period 9th November, 2010 to 5th February, 2011. The said agreement was finalized at the plaintiff s registered office. 3. The plaintiff company claims to have made an advance payment of ₹ 15,66,50,000/- on various dates via RTGS and Fund Transfer according to the terms of the agreement, which was duly received by the d ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the amount of ₹ 5,50,00,000/- after adjusting ₹ 1,00,00,000/- due to the plaintiff company. Hence, various opportunities were provided to the defendant by the plaintiff company to pay the outstanding amount due to the plaintiff company, failing which the plaintiff company has, thus, instituted this suit against the defendant praying for a decree of ₹ 12,00,06,400/-, which includes the principle outstanding amount due to the plaintiff company and also interest @ 18% p.a. calculated from January, 2012 to December, 2013. The plaintiff company has also prayed for interest pendente lite till the date of realization of the above amount. 6. Furthermore, on 31st August, 2018, Mr. Hareram Singh, Advocate on behalf of the defend ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ent stated that the cheque dated 1st September, 2011 of ₹ 4,20,00,000 drawn in name of plaintiff company got dishonoured due to insufficient funds. The original cheque is marked as Exhibit E. The Bank memo evidencing dishonour of the cheque is marked as Exhibit F. 9. It has been established from the evidence on record that the defendant was to supply 92,000 Metric Tonnes (MT) of Iron Ore fines to the plaintiff company after the advance payment for the same was made. The plaintiff company paid a sum of ₹ 15,66,50,000/- to the defendant in lieu of the agreement with the defendant, but the plaintiff company received Iron Ore fines worth only ₹ 5,84,10,000/-, thus supply of iron ore fines worth ₹ 8,82,40,000/- remaine ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
