VIJAY TRADERS Vs. BAJAJ AUTO LIMITED

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal at the instance of the plaintiff has been directed against the judgment and decree dated 27/1/1992 passed by the High court of Bombay in First Appeal No. 490 of 1974 affirming the judgment and decree dated 21/1/1974, passed by the Civil Judge, Senior Division, Ahmednagar dismissing the suit of the plaints-appellant except for an amount of Rs. 4,419.81 which was admitted.

(2.) The appellants hereinafter shall be referred as plaintiffs and the respondents as defendants,

(3.) The facts in brief leading to this appeal are that the plaintiffs are a trading firm registered under the Indian Partnership Act, having its office at Station Road, Ahmednagar. The defendants are a Company registered under the Indian Companies Act as a Public Limited Company having its Registered Office at Pune. The defendants are the manufacturers of scooters called Vespa Scooters and Vespa Autorickshaws, hereinafter referred to as Vespa Commercials. Due to the shortage of automobiles at the relevant time the central government in exercise of its powers conferred by Section 18-G of the Industries (Development and Regulation) Act, 1951 had promulgated an Order called the "scooter (Distribution and Sale) Control Order, 1960" and later on similar order was promulgated in respect of Vespa Commercials. The plaintiffs alleged that the defendants wanted to secure proper distribution and sale of their products mentioned above and, therefore, wanted to appoint agents at different places including Ahmednagar. Further case of the plaintiffs was that the defendants by their letter/order dated 9/12/ 10/1964, appointed the plaintiffs as their permanent sole selling agent for Vespa Scooters and 12/12/1966 for the Vespa Commercials in the district of Ahmednagar and thus they were the sole distributors of the said vehicles and the appointment was irrevocable. The plaintiffs took the plea that the appointment constituted an agency coupled with interest and the relationship between the parties was that of principal and agent. The plaintiffs alleged that they secured 2700 orders for Vespa Scooters and 501 orders for Vespa Commercials. But the defendants wrongfully terminated the distributorship with effect from 1/7/1968 for Vespa Scooters by their letter dated 4/7/6/1968 and by a subsequent letter dated 28/8/1968 the defendants terminated the distributorship for Vespa Commercials also with effect from 1/10/1968 and directed the plaintiffs to transfer the orders booked by them together with the registers and postal deposit books to their branch at Wakdevadi, Pune. The plaintiffs alleged that this termination was wrongful, illegal and without proper notice, causing loss to the plaintiffs and, therefore, filed the suit for damages for wrongful termination and rendition of accounts.