BANSAL EXPORTS PRIVATE LIMITED Vs. J C SHAH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Briefly, the plaintiff's case is that an arrangement was arrived at between it and the defendants who carry on business among others as silver merchants, dealers and agents at Ahmedabad for sale of plaintiff's silver bars on commission basis. According to the plaintiff the arrangement was that the defendant would send his orders to the plaintiff !or supply of silver bars on consignment basis for sale in Ahmedabad. Orders were given by the defendants on telephone or by letter quoting the market rate available, immediately, on receipt of the orders, the plaintiff would despatch the silver bars by train or through passenger with a covering note containing the number, weight and other details of the silver bars On receipt of the silver bars the defendant was to send the sale bills containing the sale proceeds and other expenses incurred by him in connection with each transaction and remit the net amount (after deduction of his commission) by a bank draft or cheque drawn in favour of the plaintiff either payable in Delhi on according to plaintiff's instructions. A running account was maintained by both the parties indicatfing the sale proceeds, remittances and other expenses. The silver bars sent by plaintiff to defendants at Ahmedabad were sold by defendants on commission basis. Plaintiff claims that a total amount due from defendants on account of outstanding balance and interest upto date of the suit is Rs. 3,03,640-07 p. Plaintiff further says that the cause of action arose within the jurisdiction of this court at Delhi :

(2.) The defendants have, inter-alia, pleaded that the plaintiff supplied the silver bars to the defendants at Ahmedabad, that the defendants sold the same as the plaintiff's commission agent at Abmedabad, that the payments were made by the defendants to the plaintiff at Ahmedabad and that defendants carry on business at Ahmedabad. They say that no part of the alleged cause of action for the suit has arisen within the jurisdiction of this Court. that defendants or any of them do not reside or work 'or gain within the jurisdiction of this court and as such this Court has no jurisdiction to entertain and try the suit Defendants further ;-ay that under the agreement between the parties the transaction on which the plaintiff's claim of the suit is based were subject to Ahmedabad jurisdiction and, thercfore, the jurisdiction, if any, of this court to entertain and try this suit is decided by the agreement between the parties.

(3.) On the pleadings of the partics the following issues were framed