PRAKASH TRANSPORTS Vs. LAKSHMI EXPORTS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) DEFENDANTS 1 to 5 have preferred this appeal challenging the judgment and decree dated 30. 3. 2004 made in O. S. No. 124 of 2002 on the file of Additional district Judge, Fast Track Court No. 1, Salem.

(2.) THE first respondent herein filed the suit against defendants 1 to 7 praying for judgment and Decree directing the defendants to pay a sum of rs. 13,03,240/- with subsequent interest jointly and severally and also out of the assets of the defendants 1, 2 and 6.

(3.) THE case of the plaintiff is that M/s. Bhandari Garments Ind. , of Kathmandu in Nepal placed orders with it for supply of export fabrics and as per the orders, the plaintiff despatched fabrics for the total value of Rs. 9,63,465. 10 under three Invoices to Kathmandu. It is further stated in the plaint that the first defendant is the Branch office and the second defendant is the Head office of the lorry transport and the defendants 3 to 5 are the Partners of the defendants 1 and 2 and they have their sister concern at Kathmandu which was run by defendants 4 and 7 as Directors of sixth defendant. The plaintiff has further stated that the first defendant made representation to the plaintiff that they have Branch office at Kathmandu and they would sincerely take delivery of the consignments from Salem to be delivered at Kathmandu and on believing their representation the plaintiff sent the consignments from Salem to Kathmandu and the first defendant had taken delivery of the consignments to the total value of rs. 9,63,465. 10. According to the plaintiff, the Invoices and documents were sent to M/s. Rastriya Banijya Bank, Kathmandu through plaintiff's Bankers viz. , Canara bank, Salem and the plaintiff learns that the consignments have reached kathmandu and without the knowledge of the plaintiff the defendants appear to have either sold or delivered the goods to the consignee or third party and should have appropriated the value thereof and their action is liable for criminal action apart from civil liability to pay the value of the consignments with interest at the rate of 12% per annum. The plaintiff has further stated that inspite of several demands by phone and fax message the defendants have been giving evasive replies and considering the business relationship with the defendants the plaintiff believed their representations and assurances and the first defendant sent a copy of their letter dated 14. 2. 1997 stating that he has informed their Kathmandu office for taking necessary action to make the payments to the plaintiff. It is further stated by the plaintiff that it sent a letter dated 15. 7. 1997 to the first defendant directing him to settle the claim and it was not done and hence the plaintiff has filed the suit for recovery of the amount of Rs. 9,63,465. 10 from the defendants being the value of three consignments taken by the defendants with interest at the rate of 12% per annum.