Explicit Averments Are Sufficient to Establish Knowledge: Supreme Court Restores Complaint Under Section 138 NI Act MACT | Just Compensation Must Factor in Loss of Dependency, Future Prospects, and Emotional Plight of Survivors: Supreme Court Compensation Must Reflect Justice, Not Delays—Court Shifts Market Valuation to 2019: Supreme Court Orders Compensation Recalculated for Land Acquired in 2003 Child’s Welfare Takes Precedence Over Parental Disputes: Supreme Court Modifies Interim Visitation Arrangement Settlement Cannot Justify Quashing Criminal Proceedings in Economic Offenses: Supreme Court Supreme Court Restores Higher Compensation for Land Acquired in Mewat: High Court Erred in Undervaluation Non-Alienability of Assigned Lands is a Non-Negotiable Legal Principle: Supreme Court of India Fraudulent Claims Cannot Prevail: Courts Must Deny Relief to Litigants with Unclean Hands: Supreme Court Non-Alienability of Assigned Lands is Fundamental to Public Policy: Supreme Court on the Andhra Pradesh Assigned Lands Act, 1977 MCD Authorized to Initiate Tariff Adoption Under Section 63 Electricity Act: Supreme Court Reinstates Delhi Waste-to-Energy Project Unexplained Delays and Contradictions in Evidence Lead to Acquittal: Telangana High Court No Mens Rea or Loss to State Exchequer: Punjab & Haryana High Court Quashes FIR in Cartage Policy Case Bar Councils cannot impose additional charges contrary to Supreme Court directives: Kerala HC Investigation is not theatrics; it must serve justice with coherence and truth: J&K HC Quashes FIRs in a Case of Alleged Legal System Exploitation Acquittal in Criminal Case Does Not Affect Disciplinary Proceedings or Forfeiture of Gratuity: Gujarat High Court Delhi High Court Restores Wife’s Right to Cross-Examination, Calls for Sensitivity in Matrimonial Cases Order 6 Rule 17 | Subsequent Events Can Justify Amendment of Pleadings Even After Trial: Calcutta High Court Order VII Rule 11 CPC | Triable Issues Arising From Contradictory Sale Deeds Demand Full Adjudication Through Trial: Bombay High Court Mere Allegations Won't Suffice: AP High Court Orders Government to Pay Contractor, Reduces Interest on Recovery Suspicion Cannot Substitute Proof: Allahabad High Court Acquits Appellant in Circumstantial Evidence-Based Murder Case No Evidence, No Resumption: Andhra High Court Confirms Injunction Protecting Plaintiffs’ Possession of Lands Desertion and irretrievable breakdown of marriage, sustained for over two decades, constitute mental cruelty: Allahabad High Court Dissolves 34-Year-Old Marriage Acquittal in Criminal Case Must Prompt Review of Dismissal: Telangana High Court There Must Be an Intention to Provoke or Drive the Victim to Commit Suicide: High Court Discharges Accused in Abetment of Suicide Case Plaintiffs' Claim of Private Ownership Over Public Road Fails: Balance of Convenience Favors Defendants, Rules Bombay High Court No Prima Facie Case Against Petitioners: Calcutta High Court Quashes FIR on Unauthorized Construction Investigation Delayed; Fundamental Right to Travel Cannot Be Curtailed Without Justification: Delhi High Court Upholds Suspension of LOC Minority Members Cannot Stall Redevelopment: Gujarat High Court Upholds Majority Consent in Nidhi Apartment Case” Sufficient Proof of Security Ownership is Essential: Kerala High Court in Partition Suit Madras High Court Quashes Hate Speech Case Against Political Leader Over YouTube Remarks 'Employers Cannot Unilaterally Alter Employment Terms: Punjab And Haryana High Court Suspicious Circumstances Invalidated Unregistered Will in Partition Dispute: Supreme Court Consent from State Not Required for Investigation of Offenses Under Central Acts Against Central Government Employees: Supreme Court Vague Allegations Cannot Justify Criminal Proceedings: Supreme Court Quashes FIR Against Foreign National Strict Proof Not Required in Accident Claims; Preponderance of Probability Is Sufficient: Supreme Court Leaseholders of Shamlat Deh Lands Are Not Entitled to Ownership; Eviction Orders Upheld: Supreme Court Environmental and Energy Laws Must Be Harmonized to Tackle Waste Challenges: Supreme Court Vague Allegations Unsupported by Evidence Cannot Sustain Criminal Prosecution: Supreme Court Quashes FIR Under Sections 354 and 506 IPC Acquittal in Primary Offence Nullifies Proclaimed Offender Status and Section 174A IPC Proceedings: Supreme Court Merits of the Case Should Not Be Prejudged at Bail Stage: Supreme Court Quashes High Court’s Bail Order in MCOCA Case Quashing | Cognizance Without Compliance to Section 195 CrPC Vitiates Entire Proceedings: Supreme Court Quashes Criminal Proceedings

Commercial Court’s Assessment of Disputed Transactions and Defective Goods Claims Upheld; 18% Interest Justified Under MSMED Act – Delhi High Court

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a detailed judgment passed by the High Court of Delhi, the bench comprising Hon’ble Mr. Justice Vibhu Bakhru and Hon’ble Ms. Justice Tara Vitasta Ganju dismissed an appeal filed by Casa 2 Stays Pvt. Ltd., thereby upholding the Commercial Court’s decree which had ordered the appellant to pay ₹8,49,385 with an 18% per annum interest for goods supplied by Comfia Ecom Private Ltd.The legal crux of the judgment revolves around the interpretation and application of the Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises Development Act, 2006 (MSMED Act), particularly concerning the entitlement to pre-suit interest and the verification of claims regarding the supply of defective goods.

The appeal stemmed from a commercial dispute wherein Comfia Ecom alleged non-payment for 2500 T-shirts supplied under an invoice dated June 30, 2018. Casa 2 Stays contested the transactions and claimed the goods were defective. Furthermore, the appellant challenged the computation of 18% pre-suit interest, asserting that Comfia Ecom had not established its status under the MSMED Act nor provided adequate notice regarding the interest penalty.

The court found substantial evidence in the form of ledger entries and email exchanges which confirmed ongoing transactions and outstanding payments specific to the invoice in question.

The court noted that only 22 out of the 2500 T-shirts were disputed regarding quality. There was no evidence of a full return or sufficient denial of receipt, thereby undermining the appellant’s claim of defective goods.

The Commercial Court’s finding on the entitlement to 18% per annum pre-suit interest was upheld. It was determined that the appellant had received adequate notice and that the respondent’s status under the MSMED Act was sufficiently established to warrant such interest.

The High Court dismissed the appeal, affirming the Commercial Court’s decision which required Casa 2 Stays Pvt. Ltd. To fulfill its financial obligations including the principal amount and accrued interest as per the MSMED Act’s provisions.

Date of Decision: May 13, 2024

Casa 2 Stays Pvt. Ltd. Vs Comfia Ecom Private Ltd.,

Similar News