FORGETECH PVT LTD Vs. SAYEE INDUSTRIES

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS application is filed under O. 14, R. 8 O.S. Rules read with S. 144 Code of Civil Procedure, for a direction to the respondent plaintiff herein to redeposit the sum of Rs. 1,85,000/- with interest at 16% per annum from 14.2.1990 till dale or deposit. The applicant/defendant in his affidavit states as follows:? The applicant is the defendant. The plaintiff had filed the suit for recovery of Rs. 1,84,152.44 from the defendant as labour charges, Along with the suit the respondent/plaintiff filed Applic ation No. 6509 of 1988 for interim injunction restraining the applicant from interfering with the possession of the plaintiff and filed an application for appointment or an Advocate-Commissioner to take delivery of the materials of the applicant from the factory of the plaintiff. The application for interim injunction and the application filed by the applicant herein were disposed of by common order dated 23.3.1989 by which the applicant was directed to furnish a bank guarantee Rs. 1,85,000/- and on such bank guarantee, the respondent was directed to deliver the materials.

(2.) THE respondent/plaintiff has filed an application for modification of the order. THE said application was dismissed. THE appeal preferred by the respondent was also dismissed. Since the respondent did not deliver the materials, the applicant has filed an application for a direction and it was ordered on 28.4.1989, and thereafter the materials were delivered. On receipt of the suit summons with the plaint on 31.5.1989, the applicant came to know the suit claim. THE defendant is liable to pay only Rs. 4561.49, credit payments rejected, the goods were not given effect to, Bills were there, in respect of some transactions, but not in respect of any transaction with the plaintiff and the defendant. THEre were also signed vouchers for receipt of the amount received by the respondent. All these things have to be instructed to the counsel for the defendant. He could not give instructions in time. THErefore on 7.2.1990 a decree was passed in favour of the plaintiff as prayed for. THE applicant has, therefore filed Application No. 4983 of 1990 for setting aside the ex parte decree. It was allowed on condition of payment of Rs. 1750/- as costs. THE cost was paid and the suit was restored to file. THE written statement has been filed. In the written statement, the defendant has stated that only a sum of Rs. 4134.52 is due and the plaintiff is liable to pay the defendant Rs. 80,707.60 and it has to be adjusted. THE defendant was directed to furnish bank guarantee for Rs. 1,85,000/- in pursuance of the order dated 23.3.1989. THE defendant furnished bank guarantee. Before the defendant could have moved the application for setting aside the ex parte decree, the respondent/plaintiff invoked the Dank guarantee and realised Rs. 1,85,000/- on 14.2.1990. THE plaintiff is not entitled for the same. THErefore a direction has to be given to the respondent/plaintiff to redeposit the sum of Rs. 1,85,000/- with interest at 16% per annum from 14.2.1990 till date of deposit.

(3.) THE point for consideration is whether the applicant/defendant is entitled to an order directing the respondent/plaintiff to deposit a sum of Rs. 1,85,000/- with interest at 16% p.a. from 14.2.1990 till date of deposit?