GEEP BATTERIES PVT. LTD. Vs. K.D. MUTHAPPA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this appeal, the defendant has challenged the judgment and decree dtd. 21/7/2012 passed in O.S.No.437/2010 on the file of the IV Additional Senior Civil Judge, Mysore (for brevity 'the Trial Court') in decreeing the suit for a sum of Rs.16,75,000.00.

(2.) For the sake of convenience, parties shall be referred as per their status before the Trial Court.

(3.) Brief facts of the case are, plaintiff is a Real Estate Agent running his business in the name of 'Cauvery Estate'. The defendant is a Private Limited Company having its registered office at Thane, Maharashtra, owning factory situated at Mysore in plot bearing Nos.120(P), 121 and 122(P) at Belagola Industrial Area, Mysore. The plaintiff was acquainted with one Mr.D.B.Prasanna Kumar, who was in-charge of affairs of the defendant at Mysore. In the year 2009, the Managing Director of the defendant Mr.Aziz Chil had approached the plaintiff to render his services in securing a prospective buyer for the industrial plot. Mr.Deepak Bhat, the present Chairman of the defendant also held discussion with plaintiff to secure the prospective buyer. Based on such discussion, the plaintiff has secured Mr.Deepak Abbhi and Mrs.Seema K.Abbhi as the prospective buyers. With the aid and liaison of plaintiff, sale was finalised for Rs.16,75,00,000.00 and an agreement was entered into between them on 15/12/2009 and an advance sale consideration of Rs.5.00 lakhs was paid. Prior to entering into the agreement, the defendant was specifically informed by the plaintiff that a sum equivalent to 1% of the total sale consideration shall be his brokerage charges and in this regard, a commission agreement was executed between plaintiff and defendant on 17/11/2009. After execution of the sale deed, it was informed that brokerage charges would be despatched from the Head Office of the defendant, once Chairman returned to Mumbai. Thereafter the plaintiff approached the defendant over telephone and he was informed that payment being under process. He was asked to send the bill and on 5/4/2010, the plaintiff sent the same through courier, but plaintiff did not receive his brokerage charges as agreed. The defendant's officers did not respond to his calls, so also the Chairman of the defendant. Ultimately, the plaintiff approached Mr.D.B.Prasanna Kumar at Mysore requesting him to arrange for payment of his brokerage charges and in this regard, several e-mails were also sent to the defendant. On 26/4/2010, a legal notice was issued to the defendant to clear the liability. On 21/5/2010, defendant issued a reply stating that he might receive brokerage charges from the purchaser of the property and defendant was not liable to pay the brokerage. Seeking recovery of Rs.18,00,875.00, the plaintiff has filed the instant suit.