- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:33423 RFA No. 100 of 2022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 3RD DAY OF JULY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HANCHATE SANJEEVKUMAR REGULAR FIRST APPEAL NO. 100 OF 2022 (MON) BETWEEN: M/S. GLOBAL PRINTECH COMPANY REP. BY ITS PARTNER, B. SHEKAR AGE 33 YEARS S/O T. BALAKRISHNA OFFICE AT. NO.70/1, K.B.TEMPLE STREET 6TH BLOCK, RAJAJINAGAR BENGALURU - 560 010. …APPELLANT (BY SRI. PRASANNA V.R, ADVOCATE) AND: M/S. BHAWAR PAPER AGENCY REP. BY ITS PROPRIETOR, SRI. POLARAM, S/O LAKMARAMJI AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS R/AT NO.333, 6TH BLOCK RAJAJINAGAR, BENGALURU - 560 010. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. UDAY K.S, ADVOCATE) THIS RFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 96 OF CPC 1908 AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 26.03.2018 PASSED IN OS No.3611/2015 ON THE FILE OF THE XLIII Digitally signed by THEJAS KUMAR N Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:33423 RFA No. 100 of 2022 ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE, BENGALURU, DECREEING THE SUIT FOR RECOVERY OF MONEY. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HANCHATE SANJEEVKUMAR ORAL JUDGMENT The defendant/appellant has filed the appeal calling in question the judgment and decree passed in O.S.No.3611/2015 dated 26.03.2018 by the Court of XLIII Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge at Bengaluru (CCH.No.44), whereby the suit filed for recovery of money is decreed. 2. For the sake of convenience and easy reference, the parties are referred to as per their rankings before the Trial Court. 3. It is the case of the plaintiff that the plaintiff is a dealer in paper mart by selling papers and the defendant is a customer of the plaintiff. The defendant was purchasing paper material from the plaintiff for past many - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:33423 RFA No. 100 of 2022 years and the plaintiff used to supply the goods as and when required by the defendant on credit basis, which has been raised against the invoice and the defendant was running account with the plaintiff and the plaintiff maintained the accounts of the transaction and payments made by the defendant. 4. Since, the defendant became defaulter of the payment, the plaintiff had filed suit for recovery of money of Rs.6,74,335/-. The defendant has filed his written statement and contended that the plaintiff has not furnished true accounts and has not maintained proper accounts, claiming the entire amount. The plaintiff has not furnished any particulars regarding invoice number, date, quantity of paper supplied and the value of the same. Therefore, the defendant was unable to traverse the averments. But, the defendant/appellant has admitted the contention at paragraph No.3 in the plaint. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:33423 RFA No. 100 of 2022 5. Based on the pleadings of the parties, the trial Court has framed the following issues. "1) Whether plaintiff proves that defendant has purchased paper material from plaintiff from time to time on credit basis and was due in a sum of Rs.4,21,479/- as on 10.10.2012? 2) Whether plaintiff proves that it is entitled to recover interest at the rate of 24% p.a. on the outstanding balance totally amounting to Rs.2,52,856/-? 3) Whether plaintiff is entitled for the relief of recovery of an amount of Rs.6,74,335/- with future interest at 24% p.a.? 4) What order?" 6. The plaintiff is examined as PW.1 and got marked the documents as per Exs.P1 to P6. The defendant has not adduced any oral or documentary evidence. 7. Upon considering the pleadings and material on record, the trial Court decreed the suit as prayed for by the plaintiff. The plaintiff by documentary evidence i.e., - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:33423 RFA No. 100 of 2022 confirmation of accounts, cheque issued by the defendant/appellant and ledger extracts and other documents, has proved the case. Therefore, decreed the suit. 8. Being aggrieved by the same, the defendant filed the present appeal by raising various grounds and learned counsel for the appellant/defendant inconsonance with the grounds raised, has submitted that the plaintiff has not maintained true accounts and therefore, the defendant was unable to traverse what was the exact amount. Therefore, the observation made by the trial Court is not correct. Further, submitted that the defendant has not contested the suit. Therefore, prays to remand the case to the trial Court. 9. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondent/plaintiff submitted that the defendant has not disputed that the defendant was purchasing paper materials from the plaintiff on credit basis and defendant owes an amount to the plaintiff. This relationship and - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:33423 RFA No. 100 of 2022 money transaction by the defendant is not disputed. When this being the case, the defendant/plaintiff has proved the case by placing evidence on record and the defendant has not disputed the transaction. Further, submitted that in execution petition, the defendant has paid the amount and only a small part of amount is due to the plaintiff. Therefore, the defendant has admitted the transaction and the amount paid. Hence, submitted that the Trial Court is correct in decreeing the suit. Hence, prays to dismiss the appeal. 10. Upon hearing the learned counsels on both the sides, the following points would arise for consideration: 1. Whether, under the facts and circumstances involved in the case, the plaintiff proves that the defendant owes the amount claimed in the plaint and thus defendant is liable to pay the same to the plaintiff? 2. Whether, the judgment and decree passed by the trial Court requires interference by this Court? - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:33423 RFA No. 100 of 2022 11. Upon considering the pleadings made by both the parties, the plaintiff is dealer in paper mart and defendant is a customer to the plaintiff. The defendant was purchasing paper materials from the plaintiff on credit basis. These facts are not disputed by the defendant as contents at paragraph 3 are admitted. The question is regarding quantum of money claimed by the plaintiff. The plaintiff has produced ledger extract at Ex.P6 and statement of confirmation of accounts at Ex.P1. To convert these documents, the defendant has not placed any evidence. Further, the defendant has issued cheque at Ex.P2 and the same is not honored. Hence, the plaintiff has issued legal notice based on the endorsement issued by the bank. Therefore, all these evidence on record considered by the Trial Court found to be proper. Therefore, there is no illegality and perversity found in the judgment and decree passed by the Trial Court. 12. Further, upon considering the submission made by the learned counsel for the plaintiff/respondent that, in - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:33423 RFA No. 100 of 2022 execution proceedings filed in pursuance to the judgment and decree passed in the suit, the defendant has paid substantial amount to the plaintiff and only a small part of amount is due to the plaintiff in the execution proceedings. 13. Therefore, upon appreciating the evidence on record in the background of the pleadings, I do not find any illegality and perversity in the judgment and decree passed by the Trial Court. Therefore, there is no merit found in the appeal. Hence, the appeal is liable to be dismissed. Hence, I answer to point No.(i) in the affirmative and point No.(ii) in the negative. 14. In the result, I proceed to pass the following: ORDER The Regular First Appeal is dismissed. Sd/- (HANCHATE SANJEEVKUMAR) JUDGE rv List No.: 1 Sl No.: 33