SAHIDULLAH MUNSHI,J. - (1.) The Court : This is a suit filed by plaintiff company, Surya Alloy Industries Limited, praying for a decree against the defendant for a sum of Rs.84,98,224/- together with pendentelite interest and interest on judgment @ 18% per annum and also for other consequential reliefs. Plaintiff has claimed above-mentioned decree for goods sold and delivered by it to the defendant. In a nutshell, the plaint case is as follows :- a) Since inception of the plaintiff company it has been carrying on business of manufacturing diverse railway stores items including SGCI Inserts and metal liners of various specifications. b) The defendant is engaged in a business of manufacturing of mono block concrete sleepers and represented it to be a Part-I approved vendor by Research Design and Standard Organization (RDSO) for manufacturing and supply of the aforesaid sleepers to Indian Railways. c) Defendant approached the plaintiff at its registered office at Kolkata within the jurisdiction of this Court for supply of diverse quantities of SGCI Inserts, a material used for manufacturing of railway track items. The defendant represented that it had entered into an agreement dated 6th December, 2013 with the Engineer/TPS, Northern Railway for manufacturing and supply of pre-stressed mono block concrete sleeper (pre-tension type) for broad gauge (1673 mm.) to Drg No.T-2496 to suit 60 kg. UIC rail as per RDSO design and IRS specification No.T-39-85 (Third Revision May, 1996) (hereinafter referred to as the stores). d) Pursuant to a negotiation that followed, at the office of the plaintiff, it agreed to supply and the defendant agreed to accept, SGCI Inserts of agreed size and specifications. It was further agreed that the supply would be effected on the basis of specific orders to be placed by the defendant upon the same being pre- inspected by RITES and that payment, therefore, would be released by the defendant as per invoice raised by the plaintiff immediately after 30 days from the date of dispatch of materials. e) Defendant placed three separate purchase orders dated 9th November, 2015, 8th February, 2016 and 17th June, 2016 on the plaintiff for supply of 30,000, 60,000 and 1,00,000 pieces respectively of SGCI Inserts to the said defendant at the rates and on the terms as per purchase orders. The said purchase orders were placed at the registered office of the plaintiff at 1/1, Camac Street, 3rd Floor, Kolkata - 700016. f) In order to execute the purchase orders from time to time the plaintiff invited RITES Limited by issuing call letters for inspection of SGCI Inserts once they are ready for supply to the defendant. g) RITES duly inspected the said goods and on passing the same issued inspection certificate in respect of such goods. h) In terms of the purchase order and upon having pre- inspected by RITES Limited the plaintiff supplied 1,23,710 pieces of SGCI Inserts under eight several invoices to the defendant which the defendant received, acknowledged and accepted without any dispute or demur on any count. i) Against the total supply of Rs.1,08,10,686/- the defendant, from time to time, made part-payment to the tune of Rs.34,00,000/- to the plaintiff on account of the aforesaid supply. All such payments were made through RTGS/NEFT at the plaintiff's Banker, State Bank of India. j) Instead of making payment of the entire value of the supplies the defendant kept silent over the matter and inasmuch as the same in excess of Rs.74,10,686/- had fallen due, the plaintiff issued reminders requesting it to clear the balance sum of Rs.74,10,686/- by its letters dated 19th October, 2016 and 2nd December, 2016. It neglected to act on such reminders. k) Therefore, the plaintiff is entitled to a total sum of Rs.84,98,224/-, that is, a sum of Rs.74,10,686/- being the amount outstanding on account of price of goods sold and delivered and Rs.10,87,538/- being interest thereon calculated till 31.01.2017. l) The dealings and transactions being commercial in nature, the plaintiff has also demanded interest @18% per annum and, according to the plaintiff, it is entitled to such interest under Section 34 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908. m) Agreement for sale of SGCI Inserts was concluded by and between the plaintiff and the defendant at the registered office of the plaintiff at 1/1, Camac Street, 3rd Floor, Kolkata - 700016. n) Although, goods were supplied by it to the defendant outside the aforesaid jurisdiction, the defendant as debtor became obliged to sue their creditor, that is, the plaintiff at their registered office at 1/1, Camac Street, 3rd Floor, Kolkata - 700016, which falls within the jurisdiction of this Court. However, the orders for supply were made and received by the plaintiff at its said office within the jurisdiction of this Hon'ble Court. o) It is also evident that part-payments were made and/or routed through the plaintiff's banker within the jurisdiction of this Hon'ble Court. Accordingly, the plaintiff, in its plaint, has stated that part of the cause of action in the suit arose within the jurisdiction of this Court, however, part thereof arose outside the aforesaid jurisdiction. p) While presenting the plaint this Court granted leave to the plaintiff under Clause 12 of the Letters Patent.
(2.) Before going to the real dispute in question I have checked whether the suit is maintainable or not. Material disclosed in the plaint shows that the suit is well maintainable in law as the plaintiff's claim for the dues against the defendant has not yet been barred. Cause of action for the suit arose partly within and partly outside the jurisdiction and having regard to the leave granted under Clause 12 of the Letters Patent, this Court is vested with the jurisdiction to try the instant suit.
(3.) In this suit, despite service of writ of summons in due course, no one appeared for the defendant to contest the suit. Considering the report of the Deputy Registrar (Court) and (Judicial) dated 16th June, 2017, the matter was placed under the 'undefended' category and it was heard as an 'undefended suit'.;