IN THE COURT OF MS. VARSHA SHARMA, LD. ADD.

CIVIL
JUDGE (SENIOR DIVISION), BAHADURGARH, HARYANA

Civil Suit No.______ / 2021

IN THE MATTER OF:

M/S ALLWIN DECOR Pvt. Ltd.

Through its Director Sh. Surjeet Dhall ...PLAINTIFF

VERSUS

Md. Sajid
Prop. Of M/s Ansari Aluminium Fab ...DEFENDANT

INDEX

S. PARTICULARS PAGE COURT

NO. NO. FEE
1 Memo of the Parties
2 Recovery of Rs.1,26,409 plus
interest along with affidavit
3 List of Documents along with
documents
4 Certificate U/S 65-B of Indian
Evidence Act
5. Vakalatnama

Bahadurgarh
 Plaintiff
Date:
Through

Vikas Yadav & S.K. Garg

Advocates

IN THE COURT OF MS. VARSHA SHARMA, LD. ADD. CIVIL

JUDGE (SENIOR DIVISION), BAHADURGARH, HARYANA
 Civil Suit No.______ / 2021

IN THE MATTER OF:

M/S ALLWIN DECOR Pvt. Ltd.

Through its Director Sh. Surjeet Dhall ...PLAINTIFF

VERSUS

Md. Sajid
Prop. Of M/s Ansari Aluminium Fab ...DEFENDANT

MEMO OF PARTIES

M/S Allwin Decor Pvt. Ltd.

Plot No.179 B, HSIIDC, Sector-16,

City Bahadurgarh,

Distt. Jhajjar,

Haryana-124507

Through its Director Sh. Surjeet Dhall ...PLAINTIFF

VERSUS

Md. Sajid
Prop. Of M/s Ansari Aluminium Fab
Gali no.-4 H no. 292
Old Seemapuri
New Delhi

Also at
F-46
Old Seemapuri
New Delhi-110095 ...DEFENDANT

Bahadurgarh
Plaintiff
Date:
Through

Vikas Yadav & S.K. Garg

Advocates

IN THE COURT OF MS. VARSHA SHARMA, LD. ADD. CIVIL

JUDGE (SENIOR DIVISION), BAHADURGARH, HARYANA
 Civil Suit No.______ / 2021

IN THE MATTER OF:

M/S ALLWIN DECOR Pvt. Ltd.

Through its Director Sh. Surjeet Dhall ...PLAINTIFF

VERSUS

Md. Sajid
Prop. Of M/s Ansari Aluminium Fab ...DEFENDANT

SUIT FOR RECOVERY FOR RS. 1,26,409 (RUPEES ONE LAKH

TWENTY SIX THOUSAND FOUR HUNDRED NINE ONLY)
ALONG WITH PENDENTI-LITE INTEREST

Court Fee paid Rs._____/-

MOST RESPECTFULLY SHOWETH :-

1. That the plaintiff is a Pvt. Ltd. company having its registered office at
Plot no. 179B, HSIIDC, SECTOR-16, BAHADURGARH, DISTT.
JHAJJAR, HARYANA-124507 and is duly incorporated under The
Companies Act 2013. The true copies of Memorandum & Articles of
Association of Allwin Decor Pvt. Ltd. and Certificate of Incorporation
are annexed as ANNEXURE A (colly) and the true copy of form no.
DIR-12 is annexed as ANNEXURE B (Colly).
2. That the plaintiff has been dealing in Aluminium Composite Sheets and
has been dealing in this field since a long time. It is a well-known fact
that the director Sh. Surjeet Dhall is a man of good character and ethics.
He has a good reputation in the market as well.

3. That on 15/01/19, a resolution was passed in the meeting of Board of

Directors of Allwin Decor Pvt. Ltd about the advocate and signing
authority directors namely Sh. Ram Darshan Goyal and Sh. Surjeet
Dhall in this litigation. The certified copy of this resolution is annexed
as ANNEXURE C.

4. That after being well acquainted with the proprietor of M/s Ansari
Aluminium Fab namely Md. Sajid, the plaintiff started business with
him on credit basis.

5. That in March 2018, the defendant ordered some material (Aluminium

Composite Sheets). The plaintiff supplied him his required material
against his order through two invoices, viz. ADPL/17-18/587 dt.
27.03.18 amounting to Rs. 46,176.00 and ADPL/17-18/594 dt. 29.03.18
amounting to Rs. 39,965.00. Thus, the closing balance in the ledger
account of the plaintiff became Rs. 86,141.00 qua his firm on 31.03.18
which subsequently became the opening balance on 01.04.18.

6. That the defendant issued one cheque no. 000003 drawn on RBL Bank
Ltd. Karol Bagh dt. 06.04.18 of Rs. 46,176.00. However, the director of
the plaintiff company was shocked to find that the cheque got
dishonoured on 07.04.18 with reasons “FUNDS INSUFFICIENT”.
 When the defendant was intimated about the dishonouring of cheque,
he narrated some allegedly genuine reason and asked to deliver some
more goods.

7. That when the plaintiff asked about the previous payment, the
defendant assured the plaintiff that he would be making regular
payments after the delivery of the goods which were being ordered
then.

8. That the plaintiff trusted him and again supplied him goods through
invoice no. ADPL/18-19/020 dt. 07/04/18 amounting to Rs.
1,49,908.00, and thus the outstanding liability reached to Rs.
2,36,049.00.

9. That the defendant made some part payment through four installments
of UPI mode as following:

i) On 09.04.18 Rs. 15,000.00

ii) On 09.04.18 Rs. 10,000.00

iii) On 16.04.18 Rs. 25,000.00

iv) On 16.04.18 Rs. 25,000.00

__________________

TOTAL- Rs. 75,000.00

So, out of Rs. 2,36,049.00, Rs. 75,000.00 was paid by him leaving
behind the outstanding amount as Rs. 1,61,049.00.
10. That the defendant started demanding some more material and the
plaintiff started believing that he had come on the right and fair track of
smooth business. So the plaintiff on 17.04.18 supplied him goods
through invoice no. ADPL/18-19/046 amounting to Rs. 60,360.00
making the outstanding amount Rs. 2,21,409.00. The true copies of all
the invoices are annexed as ANNEXURE D (COLLY).

11. That after several repeated reminders of payment, the defendant issued
one cheque no. 222544 of Rs. 50,000.00 which got encashed on
20.06.18 and thus leaving behind the outstanding amount to Rs.
1,71,409.00.

12. That the plaintiff did not find it fit that the defendant was not making
the payments timely, systematically and honestly. So the directors once
again requested the defendant to clear the dues.

13. That as a result, the defendant issued one more cheque no. 222545
drawn on Axis Bank Ltd. Dilshad Colony, Delhi in the first week of
July 2018 amounting to Rs. 50,000.00. However, this cheque got
dishonoured on 11.07.18 with reason “FUNDS INSUFFICIENT”. This
dishonouring was nothing but the shock to the plaintiff since it was
completely unexpected. The directors started giving reminders to the
defendant, plus the sales executives of the plaintiff also started visiting
him for the sole purpose to get the outstanding amount paid.

14. That after so many repeated requests and reminders, the defendant
issued one more cheque no. 222554 amounting to Rs. 30,000.00 in the
 end of July 2018 which got encashed on 30.07.18 and thus leaving the
outstanding amount to Rs. 1,41,409.00.

15. That the directors now began to worry and conveyed the same to the
defendant. But the defendant told them not to worry and assured that all
their dues would certainly be paid within 2-3 months from then.

16. That the plaintiff had nothing to disbelieve the defendant and remained
silent till first week of September 2018, when once again he was
contacted regarding the dues. The defendant told the plaintiff to
represent the cheque no. 222545 drawn on Axis Bank Ltd. which had
been dishonoured in July 2018 with reason FUNDS INSUFFICIENT
and was of amount Rs. 50,000.00. The plaintiff with sufficient trust
about the encashment of the said cheque, represented that cheque. But
the cheque once again got dishonoured on 11.09.18 with reason
FUNDS INSUFFICIENT.

17. That the plaintiff informed the defendant about the fate of the cheque.
And the defendant in reply assured the plaintiff that he would be
making all the due payments through NEFT in first week of October
2018. The plaintiff once again decided to remain silent and wait till first
week of October 2018.

18. That on 05.10.18, the defendant paid only Rs. 15,000.00 and that too in
two installments of Rs. 5,000,00 and Rs. 10,000.00 through UPI mode
and leaving the outstanding amount of Rs. 1,26,409.00. The true copies
of the ledger account revealing all the transactions are annexed as
ANNEXURE E (COLLY).
19. That the defendant then completely stopped responding to all sorts of
communication regarding payment reminders. He also ignored the sales
executives visiting him to ask the dues.

20. That the plaintiff was left with no alternative but resort to a legal
proceeding. Therefore, the plaintiff sent a legal notice to the defendant
through its counsel on 10/05/19. The true copies of legal notices sent at
two addresses are annexed as ANNEXURE F (COLLY).

21. That it is pertinent to mention that the address on which the legal notice
was sent (Gali no. 4, H no. 292, Old Seemapuri, New Delhi) on had
been given by the defendant himself and it is quite surprising that the
same address is being reflected on the GST portal. The print out
showing the status of the defendant on the GST portal is annexed as
ANNEXURE G. However, the said legal notice was never delivered
and returned with remark “No such person” on 13/05/19. The returned
envelope containing the legal notice is annexed as ANNEXURE H.

22. That on 17/05/19, the counsel of the plaintiff again sent the legal notice
to a different address of the defendant (F-46, Old Seemapuri New
Delhi-110095), which the directors of the plaintiff got from someone,
through speed post. This time the legal notice was successfully
delivered to the defendant on 21/05/19. The true copies of the speed
post receipts are annexed as ANNEXURE I and the print out of the
tracking record are annexed as ANNEXURE J (COLLY).
23. Finally, one sales executive was successful in getting a cheque bearing
no. 222551 amounting to Rs. 40,000 from the side of the defendant.
However, this cheque too got dishonoured upon presentation and
returned with reason “FUNDS INSUFFICIENT” on 20/07/19.

24. That the plaintiff tried his best to contact the defendant to inform him
about the fate of the aforementioned cheque but the defendant again
stopped all sorts of communication and started ignoring the sales
executives.

25. That with extreme struggle and great difficulty, in July 2021, one
payment collection executive was finally able to get one cheque bearing
no. 222552 amounting to Rs. 40,000.00 out of the defendant’s total
outstanding balance of Rs. 1,26,409.00. And this time, the executive
was assured that this cheque will not get dishonoured.

26. That this time, the plaintiff lost all patience to find that the
aforementioned cheque again got dishnoured with reason “ACCOUNT
BLOCKED” on 31/07/21.

27. That it is pertinent to mention that the defendant intentionally and

deliberately received the goods as per his order and the plaintiff
supplied the same but the defendant due to his malafide intention has
not been paying the outstanding amount against the discharge of his
liability.

28. The true copy of the ID proof of the Director of plaintiff company is
annexed as ANNEXURE K.
29. That this utterly unprofessional and unreasonable behaviour of the
defendant prima facie reveals the malafide intent of the defendant to
withhold the money of the plaintiff and deprive the director, Sh. Surjeet
Dhall, of his lawful right over his money. It is pertinent to mention here
that this behaviour is not only absurd but is also causing great financial
and mental agony to the director of the plaintiff company amidst this
unfavourable covid situation.

30. That the cause of action for the present suit arose in March 2018 when
the defendant approached the plaintiff to place his order. The cause of
action further arose on 27.03.18 and 29.03.18 when the plaintiff
supplied the defendant his required material through invoices
ADPL/17-18/587 and ADPL/17-18/594 respectively. The cause of
action further arose on 06/04/18 when the defendant issued one cheque
no. 000003 which got dishonoured. The cause of action further arose
on 07/04/18, when the defendant was supplied his ordered goods
through invoice no. ADPL/18-19/020. The cause of action again arose
when the defendant made partial payments through four installments
via UPI. The cause of action further arose on 17/04/18, when the
defendant was again supplied his goods through invoice no. ADPL/18-
19/046. The cause of action further arose on 20/06/18, when the
defendant issued one cheque no. 222544 to make a partial payment out
of his total liability. The cause of action again arose on 11/07/18 when
the defendant’s cheque no. 222545 was dishonored. It further arose on
30/07/18, when another cheque no. 222554 was issued by the
defendant. The cause of action again arose on 11/09/18, when the
defendant asked the plaintiff to re-present the cheque no. 222545 and it
again got dishonored. The cause of action further arose on 05/10/18,
 when the defendant paid only Rs. 15,000.00 and that too in two
installments of Rs. 5,000,00 and Rs. 10,000.00 through UPI mode. The
cause of action arose when the defendant completely stopped all sorts
of communication. The cause of action again arose on 10/05/19, when
the counsel of the plaintiff sent a legal notice to the defendant. It again
arose on 13/05/19, when that legal notice was returned unserved with
remark “no such person”. The cause of action again arose on 17/05/19,
when the second legal notice was sent and on 21/05/19, when it was
duly delivered to the defendant. It further arose on 20/07/19 when one
cheque no. 222551 got dishonoured. It further arose on 31/07/21 when
one cheque bearing no. 222552 dishonoured. The cause of action had
risen on all those different dates and occasions whenever the plaintiff
demanded the defendant to discharge his liability and clear his dues and
the cause of action is still subsisting and continuing.

31. That all the goods were sent to the defendant from the registered office
of the plaintiff from Bahadurgarh, Haryana and the invoices were also
generated at Bahadurgarh having a remark: Subject to Haryana
Jurisdiction. Therefore, by virtue of the cause of action arising at
Bahadurgarh, Haryana, this Hon’ble Court has got the territorial
jurisdiction to try and entertain the present suit.

32. That the valuation of the suit for the purpose of court fee and
jurisdiction is Rs. 1,26,409.00 along with pendente-lite and future
interest and on which the due court fee has been affixed on the plaint,
however, the plaintiff undertakes to pay the deficient court fee, if any.

PRAYER
It is therefore, most respectfully prayed that this Hon’ble Court may be

graciously pleased to:

a) Pass a decree for a sum of Rs. 1,26,409.00 along with pendente-lite

and future interest till the actual realisation of the said amount, in

favour of the plaintiff and against the defendant.

b) Pass an award for Rs. 40,000/- as litigation charges including the

court fee & the counsel fee in favour of the plaintiff and against the

defendant.

c) Pass any other order or directions which this Hon’ble Court may

deem fit and proper in the present facts and circumstances of the

case, in the interest of justice.

PL
AINTIFF

BAHADURGARH
THROUGH
DATED:
Vikas Yadav & S.K. Garg
Advocates
Enrl. D/3824/15
Chamber no. 45, Bahadurgarh Courts
Haryana
 Mob.: 9810693124
Email : skgarg1074@gmail.com

VERIFICATION:-

I, the director of the plaintiff company do hereby verify that the paras 1
to 29 are true and correct to the best of my knowledge and para 30 to
32 are true to my information and belief, while the concluding
paragraph is the prayer to the Hon’ble Court.

Verified at Bahadurgarh on this ___ day of September, 2021.

Plaintiff
 IN THE COURT OF MS. VARSHA SHARMA, LD. ADD. CIVIL
JUDGE (SENIOR DIVISION), BAHADURGARH, HARYANA

Civil Suit No.______ / 2021

IN THE MATTER OF:

M/S ALLWIN DECOR Pvt. Ltd.

Through its Director Sh. Surjeet Dhall ...PLAINTIFF

VERSUS

Md. Sajid
Prop. Of M/s Ansari Aluminium Fab ...DEFENDANT

AFFIDAVIT

I, Surjeet Dhall, S/o Lt. Sh. Om Prakash Dhall, aged about 46 years, R/o C-
162, Pushpanjali Enclave, Pitampura, Delhi-110034, director of M/s Allwin
Decor Pvt. Ltd., do hereby solemnly affirm and declare as under :-

1. That I am fully aware with the facts and circumstances of the case as
such am competent to swear the present affidavit.

2. That the contents of the accompanying suit for recovery have been
drafted by my counsel under my instructions and same have been
read over by me in my vernacular and after understanding the same I
 state that same are true and correct. The contents of the
accompanying suit may kindly be read and treated as part and parcel
of my present affidavit as the contents of the same are not being
repeated herein for the sake of brevity.

DEPONENT

Verification:

Verified at Bahadurgarh on this ____day of September, 2021 that the

contents of above affidavit are true and correct to the best of my
knowledge and belief. No part of it is false and no material is concealed
therefrom.

DEPONENT
 IN THE COURT OF MS. VARSHA SHARMA, LD. ADD. CIVIL
JUDGE (SENIOR DIVISION), BAHADURGARH, HARYANA

Civil Suit No.______ / 2021

IN THE MATTER OF:

M/S ALLWIN DECOR Pvt. Ltd.

Through its Director Sh. Surjeet Dhall ...PLAINTIFF

VERSUS

Md. Sajid
Prop. Of M/s Ansari Aluminium Fab ...DEFENDANT

LIST OF DOCUMENTS

1.True copies of plaintiff’s Memorandum and Articles of Association

along with Certificate of Incorporation & Form no. DIR-12

2.True copy of the resolution passed by the board of directors of the

plaintiff company

3.True copies of the invoices

4.True copies of the ledger account

 5.True copies of the legal notices

6.Print outs showing the status of defendant on the GST Portal

7.The returned envelope containing the legal notice in original

8.The speed post receipts in original

9.Print outs of the tracking records

10. True copy of the ID proof of the Director of plaintiff

11. Any other document/s with the permission of this Hon’ble Court

Bahadurgarh
Plaintiff
Date:
Through

Vikas Yadav & S.K. Garg

Advocates
 IN THE COURT OF MS. VARSHA SHARMA, LD. ADD. CIVIL
JUDGE (SENIOR DIVISION), BAHADURGARH, HARYANA

Civil Suit No.______ / 2021

IN THE MATTER OF:

M/S ALLWIN DECOR Pvt. Ltd.

Through its Director Sh. Surjeet Dhall ...PLAINTIFF

VERSUS

Md. Sajid
Prop. Of M/s Ansari Aluminium Fab ...DEFENDANT

A CERTIFICATE UNDER SECTION 65-B OF INDIAN

EVIDENCE ACT, 1872 AND INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY
ACT, 2000

I, Sahil Garg, S/o Sh. S.K. Garg, aged about 23 years, R/o, BA-43/A,
Ashok Vihar, Ph-1, Delhi-110052, do hereby solemnly affirm and
declare as under :-

1. That the deponent is well conversant with the facts and circumstances
of the case and hence competent to swear this affidavit.
2. That the contents of all the print outs taken from the system of the
deponent are correct and reliable as the deponent undertakes for the
optimal condition and proper functioning of his system.

3. That the deponent is fully responsible for the authenticity and

veracity of the printouts.

4. That the statement of the deponent is true and correct.

DEPO
NENT

Verification

Verified at Bahadurgarh on this ____day of September, 2021 that the

contents of above affidavit are true and correct to the best of my
knowledge and belief. No part of it is false and no material is concealed
therefrom.

DEPONENT