LALIT KUMAR BAGLA Vs. BINDAL AGRO CHEMICALS LTD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE battle of the 'rolls Royce' - this title would truly epitomize this long drawn out battle for the last sixteen years between the parties. Mr. Lalit Kumar Bagla ('bagla/plaintiff for short) sold a Blue Rolls Royce car bearing chasis No. ANH-24457 to M/s Bindal Agrochem Ltd ('bindal/defendant' for short ). Bagla claims that the balance price is due while the Bindal and Oswals claim that the full price stands paid.

(2.) BAGLA claims to be a reputed dealer in imported cars, in an era when imported cars were a great luxury and there were limited numbers of both sellers and purchasers. M/s Bindal Agrochem. Ltd is a public limited company while defendant No. 2/mr. Abhey Oswal in CS (OS) No. 1477/1994 is the Managing Director of M/s Bindal Agrochem Ltd/defendant No. 1 in cs (OS) No. 1477/1994. Defendant No. 3 is the wife of defendant No. 2.

(3.) THE controversy arose out of the initial transaction whereby it is alleged that on 27. 09. 1991 Mr. Abhey Oswal visited the premises of the bagla and expressed his interest in buying a good imported Rolls Royce car. The plaintiff alleges that defendant No. 2 selected a 1986 model Rolls Roycm S. K. Anand. This appears to be so as at that time, the modus of importing such cars was when a person came on transfer of residence and had held the car as owner for a minimum period of one year. The possession is stated to have delivered to Mr. Abhey Oswal for an agreed sale consideration of Rs 1. 31 crore. Bagla claims to have in his possession a blank cash receipt/form nos. 29 and 30 duly signed by Mr. S. K. Anand, original owner, for purposes of further transfer of the car to some third person. Documents are stated to have been filled up by the plaintiff and handed over to defendant No. 2 and the sale price of Rs 1. 31 crore was paid to the plaintiff by a cheque dated 27. 09. 1991 drawn on Citi Bank, New Delhi. The plaintiff also claims to have signed a covering letter in respect of delivery and confirmation of having sold and delivered the Rolls Royce and obtained confirmation from the defendants. It is alleged that insurance of the vehicle was completed on 30. 09. 1991 after physical verification of the engine and chasis by the United Insurance Company Ltd. In order to establish the proof of residence, telephone bill of defendant No. 1 dated 19. 08. 1991 was handed over to the plaintiff.