V R NATHAN Vs. MAC LABORATORIES (P) LIMITED

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These are applications by the plaintiff in O. S. No. 3102 of 1966 on the file of the City Civil Court. Madras and the appellant in A. S. 371 of 1969 pending before us, for permission to amend the plaint. We shall state the facts more fully when disposing of the appeal itself. For the purpose of the present applications it is enough to state the following facts. The defendants Mac Laboratories (P.) Ltd., are manufacturers of pharmaceutical products in India and are also importers of some pharmaceutical products manufactured abroad. On 17-11-1951 they appointed the plaintiff. V. R. Nathan, as the sole distributors of their products for the then composite State of Madras. Mysore and Travancore-Cochin, with a commission of ten per cent of the profits. The defendants were to bear the organisational expenses etc. The plaintiff claims that he invested a large sum of money and did good business for the defendants and that in recognition thereof, for the mutual benefit Of both sides, another agreement was entered into on 14-5-1955. with effect from the 1st April 1955. By this agreement his tenure of distribution rights was guaranteed for 12 years from 1-4-1955, with an option to renew for a like period at the end of such term, subject to some further conditions about the commission. The plaintiff says that while he did his part of the work, the defendants failed to supply the necessary quantities of samples and pro-paganda materials and that this resulted in the decline of the sales. However, the plaintiff exercised his option of renewal for a period of 12 years by a letter dated 9-7-1966, but the defendants, who had been offering pin-pricks and making imaginary complaints as though he was at fault, sent a letter to him dated 30-8-1966, putting an end to the contract with effect from 31-8-1966. Therefore, preserving his right to claim damages, the plaintiff filed the suit O. S. 3102 of 1966 on the file of the City Civil Court. Madras, for a permanent injunction restraining the defendants from distributing, selling or otherwise dealing with their products either by themselves or by their representatives. The defendants denied the allgations in the plaint and contended that it was the plaintiff who was at fault and that, therefore, they were justified in putting an end to the contract.

(2.) Along with the plaint, the plaintiff filed an application for a temporary injunction pending disposal of the suit (I. A. 9305 of 1966). Injunction was granted by the trial Judge, but it was vacated by Alasiriswami, J., as he then was, on appeal by the defendants. The judgment of the learned Judge is reported in Mac Laboratories (P.) Ltd v. V. R. Nathan, (1967) 1 Mad LJ 353. The arguments before the learned Judge proceeded on the footing that the interim injunction was concerned only with the period upto 31-3-1967 and not with the further period of 12 years claimed by the plaintiff. Indeed, one of the factors taken into account by the learned Judge in allowing the appeal on 16-12-1966, was that the contract itself was to run only till 31-3-1967 and that the suit could not be disposed of before 31-3-1967. He observed-

(3.) After this. Mac Laboratories filed a suit O. S. 155 of 1967 on the Original Side of the Bombay High Court claiming a sum of over Rs. 2 lakhs as damages from the plaintiff for the alleged breach of contract. V. R. Nathan filed a counter claim to the tune of about Rs. 9 lakhs on the footing that the termination of the contract with effect from 31-8-1966 was illegal.