Invoices and admissions can prove debt, while contractual interest may be reduced if the claimed rate is excessive.

Invoices, admissions in correspondence and cross-examination, and the absence of proof of full payment were treated as sufficient to establish the supply of goods and the outstanding debt. The alleged demand draft payment was not accepted as a discharge because the account statement showed the amount had already been adjusted and a balance still remained. The contractual clause for interest on delayed payment was upheld, but the claimed 22% rate was reduced to a reasonable commercial rate from the date of plaint until decree and thereafter until realisation.

---

---

Issues: (i) whether the plaintiff proved supply of goods and the defendant's outstanding liability for the suit claim; (ii) whether the alleged payment of Rs. 5,00,000 by demand draft on 22.07.2009 discharged the liability; (iii) whether the plaintiff was entitled to interest at 22% per annum or to a reduced rate.

Issue (i): whether the plaintiff proved supply of goods and the defendant's outstanding liability for the suit claim.

Analysis: The plaintiff produced invoices showing supply of cement bags during the relevant period. The defendant did not specifically deny the invoices and, in cross-examination, admitted the supplies. The defendant also admitted letters in which he acknowledged the liability and undertook to pay in instalments. In the absence of any reliable material to show full payment, the documentary evidence and the admissions established the debt.

Conclusion: The issue was answered in favour of the plaintiff and against the defendant.

Issue (ii): whether the alleged payment of Rs. 5,00000 by demand draft on 22.07.2009 discharged the liability.

Analysis: The defendant produced no convincing proof of final settlement. The account statement showed that the said amount had already been adjusted towards the dues, and an outstanding balance still remained. The defence of complete discharge was therefore not substantiated.

Conclusion: The issue was answered against the defendant and in favour of the plaintiff.

Issue (iii): whether the plaintiff was entitled to interest at 22% per annum or to a reduced rate.

Analysis: The invoices contained a clause for interest on delayed payment, so the plaintiff was entitled to claim interest. However, the rate claimed was found excessive in the commercial circumstances of the case. The court therefore moderated the interest to a reasonable rate from the date of plaint till decree and thereafter till realization.

Conclusion: The plaintiff was held entitled to interest, but not at the claimed rate of 22% per annum.

Final Conclusion: The suit succeeded for recovery of the principal amount, with interest granted at a reduced rate and costs awarded.

Ratio Decidendi: Admissions in correspondence and cross-examination, together with invoices and absence of proof of payment, are sufficient to establish a money claim; where a contractual interest rate appears excessive, the court may award a moderated reasonable rate.

---