SHAH VELJI NARSEE Vs. VASANTRAI UMIYASHANKAR PANDYA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) ). THIS Second Appeal has been filed by the original plaintiff challenging the Judgment and Order passed by the 5th Additional District Judge, amravati, who had confirmed the Judgment and Decree passed by the 4th joint Civil Judge, Junior Division, Amravati, who had dismissed the suit with costs.

(2.) BRIEF facts are as follows : the plaintiff is a registered partnership firm duly registered under the partnership Act and was carrying on business of manufacturing Kumkum, gulal, Lobhan etc. and was having its place of business at Amravati. In the month of October, 1981, the defendants placed three orders on telephone with the plaintiff for supply of goods on credit. As per the said orders, the plaintiff despatched the required goods to the defendant vide motor transport receipt Nos. 130012 dated 16/10/1981, 130022 dated 21/10/1981 and 130029 dated 22/10/1981 through Ghatge and Patil Transport Private Limited, alongwith the motor receipts the credit bill dated 17/10/1981, 21st October. 1981 and 22n 22/10/1981 were also transmitted to the defendant. It was the case of the plaintiff that though the goods had reached at Bombay, the defendants did not accept the delivery of the goods and also did not pay freight charges which were payable by them. As a result the goods were lying with the transport carrier and, thereafter, the plaintiff requested the defendant to take delivery of the goods. However, the defendants failed to comply with the plaintiffs request and, therefore, it was the contention of the plaintiff that the defendants had committed breach of contract. It is the case of the plaintiff that as a result they suffered a loss and, therefore, plaintiff filed a suit seeking to recovery the damages plus interest and notice charges, in all totalling to Rs. 3,423. 15 ps. and claimed future interest at the rate of 18 per cent per annum from the date of suit till recovery.

(3.) THE defendants were served and they filed their written statement and they contended that the Amravati Court had no jurisdiction to decide and entertain the present suit as no cause of action had arisen within the jurisdiction of the Court and, therefore, requested the plaint may be returned to the plaintiff for presentation to the proper Court. It was further contended that the suit firm was not registered under the provisions of indian Partnership Act and, therefore, the suit was not maintainable. They further denied that they had placed any order with the plaintiff on telephone in the month of October, 1981. The Trial Court framed the issues which are as follows : (1) Whether this Court has jurisdiction to entertain this suit? (2) Does the plaintiff prove that it is a registered partnership firm under the Indian Partnership Act? (3) Does the plaintiff further prove that defendant has placed the order an telephone on the month of October, 1981 for supply of goods? (4) Does the plaintiff prove that the defendant committed breach of contract? (5) Does plaintiff prove that he is entitled to claim Rs. 2,271. 50 from the defendant along with interest at the rate of Rs. 18 per cent per annum on the said amount from 1/11/1981? (6) What order and decree ?