PDLSE010046092022_1_2 No.2 District and Sessions East, Saket IN THE COURT OF Ms. Vineeta Goyal District Judge (Commercial Court)-02,, SOUTH EAST. DELHI. SUMMONS FOR SETTLEMENT OF Cs (COMM)/476/2022 ISSUES, UNIPOWER PROJECTS PRIVATE LIMITED Vs SUDHIR POWER PROJECTS LIMITED (0.5,R.1,5) NEXT DATE : 05-08-2022 1, HONDA CARS INDIA LIMITED THROUGH ITs MANAGING DIRECTOR PLOT NO. Al, SECTOR4/41, SURAJPUR KASNA ROAD, GREATER NOIDA INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AREA, GAUTAM BUDIL NAGAR, UTTAR PRADESH- 201306 EMAIL [email protected] Whereas UNIPOWER PROJECTS PRIVATE LIMITED has instituted a suit against you for you are hereby summoned to appear inthis Court in person, or by 2 pleader duly instructed, and able to answer all material questions relating to the suit, or who shall be accompanied by some Persons able to answer all such questions, on the 05-08-2022 at 10:00 o'clock in the forenoon, to answer the claim; and further you are hereby directed to file on that day a written statement of your defence and to produce on the said day all documents in your possession op Power upon which you base your defence or claim for se-off or counterclaim, and where you rely on any other document whether in your possession or power or not, as evidence in support of your defence or claim for set- off or counter-claim, you shall enter such documents in a list to be annexed to the written statement. that, in default of your appearance on the day before mentioned, the suit will be ied in your absence. You apprehend your witnesses will not attend of SESS from this Court to compel the attendance of any rhe Be ae e any document that you have a right to call on the witness to produce, fori applying tothe CBtrt Sf on depositing the necessary expenses, 2, I you admit the claim, you should pay the money into Court together with the costs of the suit, "© avold execution of the decree, which may be against your person or property, or both, ‘The process is system generated and transmitted in secured manner by authorised user as such Physical signature not applied.CHECK LIS CASE INFORMATION FORMAT | cw C{~ DISTRICT Soot. EAST rena PLAINGIER PETITIONS” COMAGAINANT/ APPELLANT | DECREE HOLDER ETC. UIE EU ONES 6 RACAL ARDEA | DERE CLOTS, oR ‘ ssa eee Te Bian ON Power PRosecrs PUT ab. 2 | #6 wis OV 3 | acdiess | BCT, VARDHNANPLA DAT, FB LOC Commun ny | Cenrke, RATOvR) Gaeoee; NEU) DEL I/0027 [v4 [astnas Carano. Pinlcode:| 1 / 0O 27 S| center [wate (}remate() omer (Navenanty| ——_iSOHAN, S| pater in 7 Z [Ase 7 [mosilens | OR) DOU TOBY [emer UMpouier Pet Rg mard.com BP AaTSe ion Valuation of Suit QA] =, 60, 000/ PS SNOANT [accu Ree 7 | Nome oF tha PENDANT / ACCU Wlo Ovo 9 | Acress [Sq5, Envi | Weerku Pace, NG G2 DE vam 1) 0915 Aadhar Card No.| 5 | Gender | saief— Date of Blah Gurpreet Singh Sachdeva M maa, Souesouses Mobile No. | fe-mai: | t deva.gurpreet@ yahoo.1 | Nome OF the Extra Pary 2 Pee Wie Bio I 2 7 3 | aaaress | PCT — aT, Seceee Ty SO RAF Poh KAS R CREATER oA Tpppvsthi ing Baegioraren AREA L.. LQ hutém bodia A UTTAR Ff Aadhar Care No.| Genser [sie reste) S10 Wie 2 | Adaress 4 | Aaanar Card No. 5} Genaer | mate © | Date of Birth 7_ | Mobile Na Name OF The Exva Party 2| slo woo | 3 | Adress 4 | Asghar Gard No. | ‘s | Gender Toate(—}renaie(—) oner 6 | Date orsirh | LT? 7 | Mobile Nol, ~ “7 [e-maie SUBMITTED BY PLAINTIFF PETITIONER 1 OSFENDART JAIN THE COURT OF DISTRICT JUDGE, (SOUTH-EAST), SAKET DISTRICT COURTS, DELAT C.S.(Comm.) No. /2022 IN THE MATTER O} UNIPOWER PROJECTS PVT.LTD, «PLAINTIFF VERSUS SUDHIR POWER PROJECT LTD, & ANR, ..-DEFENDANTS INDEX Ss. "PARTICULARS Rags Cou | | No. | FEES ; | Memo of Parties exp | 3. [Suit for Recovery of Rs.7,60,0007 | ROTO | | Aa: i | (Rupees Seven Lakhs Sixty Thousend Only) wit interest thereupon along with | | pendente lite and future interest along with | accompanying Affidavit. 1 4. | Statement of Truth Q}+23 3. Uist of Documents along with Documents 94 9D [_& [Pee Raie oo 7. | Address Form 227 | all Oe =![ 8 (coma of Non-Starter Report 927 [ 9 | Vakalatnama Rs.2.00/- 294 | DELHI DATE: 2g{04]2022, THROUGH COUNSEL (G.S. SACHDEVA)IN THE COURT OF DISTRICT JUDGE, (SOUTH-EAST), SAKET DISTRICT COURTS, DELHI C.S. (Comm.) No, /2022° IN THE MATTER OF:;- UNIPOWER PROJECTS PVT.LTD. +-PLAINTIFF VERSUS SUDHRI POWER PROJECTS LTD. & ANR. «DEFENDANTS ‘TIES UNIPOWER PROJECTS PVT, LTD, THROUGH ITS AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT: 361, VARDHMAN PLAZA-II, J-BLOCK COMMUNITY CENTRE, RAJOURI GARDEN, 194, NEW DELHI-110027 «PLAINTIFF VERSUS (1)SUDHIR POWER PROJECTS LTD. THROUGH ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT: 507, INTERNATIONAL TRADE TOWER,‘NEHRU PLACE. NEW DELHI-110019 (2) HONDA CARS INDIA LTD. THROUGH ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT : PLOT NO. A-1, SECTOR 4-/41, SURAJPUR-KASNA ROAD, GREATER NOIDA INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AREA, GAUTAM BUDDHA NAGAR; UTTAR PRADESH-201306 DELHI DATE: 28/04]2022. .sDEFENDANTS ~ >BLAINTIFF THROUGH COUNSEL (G. 8. SACHDEVA)COURT FEE | 3p 0002022022 GOVERNMENT OF NCT OF DELHI -Court Fee DATES TIME : 29-APR.2022 14:57:52 Names’ OFTHE Aco nectsrenep ‘tion Location Natt OF Umi@anT ‘UniPoWeRPaovEcTS PVT Lo Seobhrnecarrno Ductassaozess0739 00uRi- Fee AMOUNT : ©9000 (Rates Hine Thowans Sgt Hunde rp} 1 Tal sy Beasd rior we Comeran| "ae ony air orca & ocking bye coun omerIN THE COURT OF DISTRICT JUDGE, (SOUTH-EAST), SAKET DISTRICT COURTS, DELHI C.S. (Comm.) No. (2022 IN THE MATTER O! UNIPOWER PROJECTS PVT. LTD. THROUGH ITS AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT: 361, VARDHMAN PLAZA-I, J-BLOCK COMMUNITY CENTRE, RAJOURI GARDEN, NEW DELHI-110027 -sPLAINTIFF VERSUS ()SUDHIR POWER PROJECTS LTD. THROUGH ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR, HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT: 507, INTERNATIONAL TRADE TOWER, NEHRU PLACE. NEW DELHI-110019 | (2) HONDA CARS INDIA. LTD. | FHROUGH ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT : PLOT NO. A-l, SECTOR 4-/41, ASURAJPUR-KASNA ROAD, GREATER NOIDA INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AREA, GREATER NOIDA, GAUTAM BUDDHA NAGAR, UTTAR PRADESH-201306 +. DEFENDANTS SUIT _FOR RECOVERY OF RS. 7.60,000/- (RUPEES SEVEN LAKHS SIXTY THOUSAND ONLY) WITH _1 TEREST THEREUPON ALONG WITH PENDENTE LITE AND FUTURE THEREUPON ALONG WITH PENDENTE LITE AND FUTURE INTEREST ARISING OUT OF A COMMERCIAL DISPUTE IN TERMS OF SECTION 2(1)(¢)(xviii) OF COMMERICAL COURTS ACT. 2015, MOST RESPECTFULLY SHOWETH: 1. That the Plaintiff is a private limited company duly incorporated under the provisions of The Companies Act, having its régistered office at its registered office at 361, Vardhman Plaza Il, J-Block, Community Centre, Rajouri Garden, New Delhi-110027, and is engaged in the business of installation of generator sets, Mr. Tajinder Bir Singh is the Director of the Plaintiff, who is even otherwise conversant with the facts, based on the records maintained by Plaintiff Company in the 7ordinary course of its business and is duly authorized to sign and to institute these proceedings on behalf of Plaintiff. That the Defendant No.1 is a public company duly incorporated under the provisions of The Companies Act, and having its registered address at 507, Intemational Trade Tower, Nehru Place, New Delhi-110019 and engaged in the business of setting up/installation of Diesel base Captive Power Plants/Generator Seis. The Defendant No.2 is also public company duly incorporated under the provisions of The Companies Act, and having its registered address at Plot No. A-1, Sector40/41, Suraj-Kasna Road, Greater Noida Industrial Development ‘Area, Greater Noida, Gautam Buddha Nagar, Uttar Pradesh-201306 and engaged in the business of manufacturing of Diesel and Petrol cats in India. |. That the Defendant No. 1, was engaged/contracted by the Defendant No.2, for the erection of two Diesel Generators of 2000 KVA at addressee No, 2’s plant site at HCIL , Tapukara, Bhiwadi, Rajasthan (hereinafter referred as “The Site”). Thereafter the Defendant No.1 sub- contracted/engaged the Plaintiff for the execution of said work at the said plant site, and consequently awarded the work for the installation aEof the abovementioned Generator Sets at the site vide Purchase orders dated 25.03.2015, . That the Plaintiff, pursuant to the said engagement/Work Order started the supply of the materials for Generator Sets for the erection of Two Diesel Generators of 2000 KVA on the site from 16.04.2015, as per the requirement, measurement and make demanded by the Defendants, That the Defendant No.1 had been making part payments/on account Payments towards the amount due and payable by the Defendant No. I, to the Plaintiff on account of material supplied and labour work executed, and consequently, the Plaintiff had been maintaining a running ledger account of the Defendant No.1, in the ordinary course of business, duly reflecting all the transactions made. That even though the material was supplied as pér the requirement Placed and work order issued, however, the Defendant No,lafter the completion of the said Work started raising unreasonable, arbitrary and imelevant issues with the Plaintiff wherein the Defendant No.1 misrepresented the Plaintiff that certain amount of goods worth Rs. §,60,000/- approx. were unnecessary and in excéss and the same shall be taken back by the Plaintiff, af= 8 7. That the Defendant No.1 without any prior notice and without any consent frem the Plaintiff arbitrarily issued a Debit Note of Rs. 8,58,528/- plus GST to the Plaintiff vide E-mail dated 27.10.2017. The said Debit Note was issued to the Plaintiff without releasing the alleged excess material as was assured to the Plaintiff. Subsequently, The Plaintiff on receipt of the said E-mail dated 27.10.2017 sent by Defendant No.! raised objections to the said Debit Note vide E-mail dated 27.10.2017, wherein the Plaintiff objected to non-releasing of alleged excess material and further objected to levy of GST on the said Debit Note and requested the Defendant No.1, td amend the said Debit Note and release the said excess material ds pre-condition for acceptance of the said Debit Note, Subsequently the Defendant No.1, again issued an arbitrary Debit Note of Rs. 7,60,000/- vide email dated 30.10.2017 that too again without Plaintiff's consent and without releasing the alleged excess material, however the same was not accepted by the Plaintiff. 8. That thereafter the Plaintiff's Managing Director also held a meeting with officials of Defendant No. 1 on 14,08,2018, seeking resolution of the issues pertaining to Debit Note and alleged excess materials, wherein the officials of Defendant No. 1 falsely assured to resolve the said issues and misrepresented to the Plaintiff to accept part Debit Note 4ee of Rs. 3,78,000/- on the pretext that PlaintifPs conditions would be fulfilled, and that goods worth Rs. 7,60,000/- were allegedly in excess and lying at the site and the same would be allowed to be retrieved by the Plaintiff from the Defendant No.2. However, on receipt of the Minutes of Meeting of the said meeting, the Managing Director of the Plaintiff was shocked to see the contents of said minutes therein and immediately vide E-mail dated 16.08.2018 refused the said Debit Note and the conditions as set forth in the said Minutes of Meeting. Further, the Plaintiff vide E-mail dated 16.08.2018, requested the Defendant No 1 to. revise the Debit Note from Rs, 7,60,000/- to Rs. 1,60,000/- as the remaining material lying at the site was found to be worth Rs, 1,60,000/- only, after due inspection was made by the Plaintiff, However, neither the excess material were allowed to be taken from the site nor any new revised Debit Note was issued to the Plaintiff. In fact, RO steps were taken by the Defendants to address the grievance of the Plaintiff and clear their outstanding amounts. - That for next two years neither the Plaintiff was not allowed to retrieve the alleged excess goods fiom the site nor any payment of Rs, 7,60,000/- of the illegal and arbitrary Debit Note was released to the Plaintiff despite several requests and reminders from the Plaintiff Thereafter the Plaintiff vide E-mail dated 15.10.2020 again requested athe Defendant No. 1, to reverse the Debit Note in their account books and release the wrongly withheld payment of Rs. 7,60,000/-. However, the Defendant did not pay any heed to the Plaintiff's request and did not make any payments towards the said due amount(s). It is pertinent to mention, that the Defendant No.2 in collusion with Defendant No.2 refused to issue any gate pass to the Plaintiff to inspect the alleged material lying on the site and assess its worth. In fact, the Defendant No.2. made wrongful and baseless claims on the goods lying on the site and claimed ownership on the said goods on the pretext thet the payment for the same goods have been already tade to the Defendant and the same were now property of the Defendant No.2. 10.That thereafter around October, 2020, a meeting was held between the officials of the Plaintiff and the Defendant No.1 at the office of the + Defendant No.l, wherein the Director of the Plaintiff namely Mr.Inderjit Singh was forced under duress to accept the Debit Note of Rs, 7,60,000)- as the Defendant No.! threatened to stop the payments of other work/contract which were of substantial amount and would had caused significant financial losses to the Plaintiff, and the Defendant No.1 also mislead the Plaintiff on the pretext that. goods worth Rs. 7,60,000/- were in excess and lying on the site and the same would be allowed to be retrieved in some time. -11.That the Plaintiff thereafter vide E-mail dated 31,07,2021 requested the Defendant No. 1, reiterated the circumstances under which the Plaintiff was forced to accept the note and further to arrange gate pass for the site for the retrieval of the alleged goods. Consequently, upon receipt of the Said Euhail the Defendant No.1’s official held a meeting with the Plaintiff's director on 05.08.2021, wherein the officials of Defendant No.1 assured to resolve the issue and arrange for gate pass, and further assured that in case the material were not worth Rs.7,60,000/-, the balance amount would be reversed on account books and payment would be made accordingly. 12.That however, the said assurance was only a hog. wash and a part of the conniving plan of the Defendants, to delay the Plaintiff from seeking/claiming its rightful claims, It is pertinent to mention that till date neither the Plaintiff has been issued any gate pass for the site to retrieve his goods nor any payment has been made to the Plaintiff for the said arbitrary and illegal Debit Note of Rs, 7,60,000/-. 13,That the Defendants collusion with each other, usurped the hard earned money of the Plaintiff by misappropriating the Plaintiff's goods at Defendants No. 2's site on the pretext of having already made payment ave[2 for the same, and thereafter not making payments for the said goods on the pretext that the same were in excess and not required, 14,That instead of making payments of the rightful claim of the Plaintiff, the Defendant No.1 issuéd an irrelevant notice invoking arbitration dated 19.10.2021 to deter my client from taking any legal action against the Defendant for the amount due and payable by the Defendants to the Plaintiff. Upon receipt of the said notice dated 19.10.2021, the Plainti&f therein replied to the said notice vide reply dated 11.11.2021, wherein the Plaintiff denied the claim of the Defendant No.1] and sought the payment of the amount of Rs. 7,60,000/- from the Defendant No.1 15.That having not been received the outstanding amount, the Plaintiff caused a notice to be served through his advocate to the Defendant dated 24.11.2021, wherein the Plaintiff sought from’ the Defendant a payment of Rs. 7,60,000/- (Rupees Seven Lakhs Sixty Thousand Only) alongwith interest @18% from June, 2017 till realization of the said amount, within 15 (Fifteen) days from the receipt of the said notice. 16.That the Defendants even on receipt of the aforementioned notice dated 24.11.2020, did not pay a single penny for the amount outstanding to the tune of Rs. 7,60,000/- (Rupees Seven Lakhs Sixty Thousand Only).13 In fact upon receipt of the. said notice, the Defendant’s official made false assurances of payments of the due amount and resolution of Plaintiff grievances , but the same were part of dilatory tactic adopted by the Defendant to evade their liabitiy for payment towards the Plaintiff and no payment was made therein. '7-That the defendant have failed to make the payments for the amount due and outstanding towards the plaintiff amounting to Rs. 7,60,000/- (Rupees Seven Lakhs Sixty Thousand Only), even‘after the receipt of the notice dated 24.11.2022, Hence, the plaintiff is entitled to recovery of the said amount along with interest from June, 2017 that is the date on which the Debit Note was issued to the Plaintiff by the Defendant. 18.That the defendants failed to comply with notice dated 24.11.2021, the Present suit is being preferred by the plaintiff praying for money decree for recovery of amount of Rs. 7,60,000/- (Rupees Seven Lakhs Sixty Thousand Only), being the amount of the Debit Notice arbitrary raised by the Defendant No.1, along with interest calculated @ 18% from June, 2017 till institution of present suit, besides relief of future mesne profits and interest thereupon from institution of present suit till " recovery of money to the plaintiff. - geMy 19.That both Defendants are jointly and severally liable for the payment of Rs. 7,60,000/- along with interest and mense profit as mentioned in the Notice dated 24.11.2021, to the Plaintiff. 20.The cause of action first arose on 25.03.2015 when the Defendant No.1 issued a Purchase orders dated 25.03.2015 for the work at site of Defendant No.2. The cause of action arose again on 30.06.2017 when the Defendant no.1 illegally and arbitrarily raised a debit note of Rs. 8,58,528/-. The cause of action arose again on 30.10.2017 when the Defendant No.1 again raised an illegal and arbitrarily debit Note of Rs. 7,60,000/-. The cause of action arose again on 14.08.2018 when the Defendant No. 1 misrepresented the Plaintiff into accepting the debit note of Rs. 3,78,000/- on pretext of excess goods. ‘The cause of action arose again*on 29.08.2018 when the Defendant No.1 made Plaintiff accept the Debit Note of Rs. 7,60,000/- on pretext of excess goods lying on site of Defendant No.2. The cause of action arose again on 15.10.2020 when the Plaintiff wrote an email to the Defendants seeking reverse of debit note of Rs. 7,60,000/- and payment of the said amount. ‘The cause of action arose again on 28.10.2020 when the Plaintiff was forced under duress and coercion by the Defendant No.1 to accept the Debit Note of Rs.7,60,000/-, The cause of action arose again on 05.08.2021 when the Defendants assured the Plaintiff of the return of athe said debit note and refund of the amounts. The cause of action arose again on 24.11.2021 when the Plaintiff caused a notice to be served upon the Defendants for recover of Rs.7,60,000/+. The Cause of action " arose again on 08.12.2021 winen the 15 days period expired pertaining to payments of Rs.7,60,000/- to the Plaintiff. The cause of action is still subsisting and shall continue to subsist till the hard eamed money of the PlaintfF is returned with interest and damages and his‘claim is settled in full. 2. ‘That the dispute in the present suit is a commercial dispute as per section 2 (1) (¢), The Commercial Courts Act, 2015, and therefore the Plaintiff has exercised and exhausted the remedy of pre-institution mediation as per section 12A of The Commercial Courts Act, 2015, wherein the Defendants reflised to appear and participate. 22.That the plaint is being filed within the period of limitation as prescribed under law, 23.That the Defendant No.1°s registered office is situated and works for gain within the territorial jurisdiction of this Hon'ble Court, Hence, this Hon‘ble Court has jurisdiction to entertain and adjudicate the present suit, /I7 6 24, That the suit for the purpose of court fees and pecuniary jurisdiction for the reliefs as valued as under:- Relief the Debit Note. For the recovery of the amount Rs. 7,60,000/- (Rupees Seven Lakhs Sixty Thousand Only), being the amount of Valuation | Court Fees Rs. 7,60,000/- | Rs. 9,800/- Total Court Fees PRAYER In the light of the foregoing, It is prayed that this Hn’ble Court may be pleased a. To Pass Money Decree of Rs. 7,60,000/- (Rupees Seven Lakhs Sixty Thousand Only),in favour of the Plaintiff and against the Defendants, for the outstanding bill amount due and payable jointly and severally by the Defendants to the Plaintiff. anb. To award an interest @18 % per annum w.e.f.June, 2017 from the date of issue of debit note of Rs. 7,60,000/- to the plaintiff and pendente lite and future interest till the sums are actually paid; ¢. To-award the cost of the suit in favour of the Plaintiff and against the Defendants, d. To grant any other/further relief in favour of the Plaintiff and against the Defendant as deemed fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. PLAINTIFF (AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE) THROUGH DELHI DATE: COUNSEL (G. 8. SACHDEVA) Verified at Delhi on the 28" day of April,2022 that the contents of the Paras 1 to 19 of the Plaint are correct to my knowledge and those of ParasIF 20 to 24 are also correct on the basis of information received and believed to be true, The last para is a prayer to this Hon’ble Court, ea AE PLAINTIFF