UNIPLAS INDIA LIMITED Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioners and respondent No.2 are fighting it out for Rs.12 lacs or more. The dispute has spilled over leading to lodging of FIR No.65/01 u/s 420 IPC at PS Vasant Vihar by respondent No.2. Petitioner wants its quashing and hence this writ petition.

(2.) . Factual matrix is by and large admitted barring a minor variation here and there. Both parties entered a high sea contract for supply of PVC resin worth Rs.26.70 lacs to petitioners by R-2. The goods were fully insured with the National Insurance Company, firstly in the name of R-2 and then endorsed in the name of petitioner company. But when the consignment was delivered at Mumbai, petitioners found 123 mt. worth Rs.14.20 lacs or so missing.

(3.) . There are two versions to the story thereafter. Petitioners claim that R-2 had the liability to deliver full cargo and it offered to compensate them for the loss and paid them Rs.15 lacs till finalisation of insurance claim. But R-2 claims that petitioners had approached it to tide over their financial stringency and that it was agreed to pay them Rs.15 lacs inclusive of interest in full and final settlement of their claim for the missing cargo on the understanding and their assurance that insurance claim for the missing goods would be reimbursed to R-2.