A food distribution business has filed a breach of contract suit against a Philadelphia
eatery, claiming the restaurant has failed to make numerous payments to the plaintiff relating to food delivery services.
Sergio I. Scuteri, a lawyer with New Jersey-based Capehart & Scatchard, filed the civil action July 24 at the Philadelphia Court of Common Pleas on behalf of Sysco Food Services of Philadelphia, which has offices at 600 Packer Avenue.
Named as defendants in the suit are Tiffin, a local Indian restaurant, and Munish Narula, a company proprietor.
The complaint states that the two parties entered into a customer account agreement on Oct. 15, 2006, whereby Sysco would supply goods to the restaurant on a regular basis in exchange for compensation by Tiffin.
Sysco delivered goods to Tiffin from Sept. 12, 2011 through at least Oct. 13, 2011, in accordance with the terms of the customer account agreement, but the defendants failed to make payments to the distribution company for that time period, the suit states.
As a result of the payment default, the suit claims, the defendants owe Sysco $24,079.42, inclusive of accrued interest of $10.50 per day, as of July 24 of this year.
The lawsuit states that Narula’s actions and omissions led Sysco to believe that if it delivered the goods to the restaurant, Sysco would be paid for its services.
“Sysco delivered the goods to the Defendants to its detriment and to the benefit of the Defendants, who profited by selling the goods and generating income without payment to Sysco,” the lawsuit reads. “Sysco continued to deliver goods to the Defendants in reliance on Narula’s promise to pay in accordance with the terms of the parties’ agreement.”
The suit further states that some time after September 2011 the defendants had entered into a repayment plan for the payment of all amounts due to Sysco under the customer agreement, and that the payments would be made by the defendants via credit card.
After that time, however, Narula refused to approve any further credit card authorizations toward the payments and, without justification, disputed the last credit card transaction.
“At all times relevant, Defendant Narula fraudulently, intentionally, willfully, and recklessly refused to give authorization for the previously agreed upon credit card transactions and further fraudulently, intentionally, willfully, and recklessly disputed legitimate credit card charges,” the lawsuit states. “Defendant Narula’s actions and inactions as aforesaid were made with the intent that Sysco rely on the credit cards for payment and to continue to supply the business with additional goods as ordered by Narula, despite knowing that the business did not have the financial ability to pay for the goods.”
The customer account agreement also provides for the recovery of reasonable attorney’s fees and any other legal expenses incurred by Sysco in the event litigation is necessary, the complaint states.
The lawsuit contains counts of breach of contract, unjust enrichment and fraud.
Sysco seeks $50,000 in damages, plus attorney’s fees, costs, interest and other court relief.
Arbitration has been scheduled for April 2013.
The case ID number is 120703040.