Swarovski India Pvt. Ltd. Vs SPA Agencies:

Swarovski India Pvt. Ltd. Vs SPA Agencies: Date of Order:3rd July, 2009:Case No.:: CS (OS) No. 1342/2004: 2009:DHC:2531: High Court of Delhi: Hon'ble Ms. Justice Aruna Suresh

 

Facts:

The plaintiff, Swarovski India Pvt. Ltd., filed a summary suit under Order 37 of the Civil Procedure Code (CPC) seeking recovery of ₹27,47,587/- from the defendants (SPA Agencies and another). The claim included ₹20,52,995/- as principal for unpaid goods supplied under 15 invoices between October and December 2001, and ₹6,94,592/- as interest at 12% per annum until 30.09.2004. Despite a legal notice dated 24.05.2004, the defendants failed to pay.

Procedural Details:

The defendants entered appearance but failed to file the application for leave to defend within the mandatory 10-day period after service of summons for judgment.

Defendants later filed two applications:

One under Section 5 of the Limitation Act for condonation of delay.

Another under Order 37 Rule 3(5) CPC seeking leave to defend.

The court examined the cause of delay and found that defendants falsely claimed service through publication and failed to prove they were unaware of the proceedings.

The application was filed after almost 60 days, with no sufficient cause shown for delay.

Issue:

Whether the defendants were entitled to condonation of delay and leave to defend the summary suit under Order 37 CPC.

Decision:

The court dismissed both applications, finding no bona fide reason or “sufficient cause” for the delay. It held that the defendants acted with negligence and had deliberately delayed the proceedings.

The statement about publication of summons was found to be false.

Condonation under Section 5 of the Limitation Act was held inapplicable due to the self-contained nature of Order 37 CPC.

Consequently, the court rejected the leave to defend.

Final Order:

Decree passed in favor of the plaintiff for ₹20,52,995/- (principal amount only), with proportionate costs.

Interest awarded at 12% per annum (pendente lite and future) from the date of institution of the suit until realization.

No pre-suit interest was granted as there was no contractual stipulation.