BIRATNAGAR JUTE MILLS LTD Vs. LALTA PRASAD GOENKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The only point urged by the defendant appellant in this appeal against the judgment and decree of Ray, J. is that the suit should have been dismissed inasmuch as the defendant company did not carry on business within the original jurisdiction of the Calcutta High Court on the date of the institution of the suit and as such, the trial court had no jurisdiction to decide it. The suit was instituted for the recovery of Rs. 8,05,545 for interest and cost in connection with certain transactions between the parties in raw jute as a result whereof the defendant became liable to pay to the plaintiff a sum exceeding Rs. 12,00,000. As the defendant could not pay the sum as set out in paragraph 2 of the plaint, it was agreed that the defendant would issue in favour of the plaintiff debentures for a sum of Rs. 6,00,000 and hundies for a sum of Rs. 6,00,000. It was further agreed according to the plaintiff that defendant would pay the balance in cash and that all the payments should be made by the defendant to the plaintiff in Calcutta within the original jurisdiction of the Calcutta High Court. Pursuant to the said agreement the defendant company on or about 18th October, 1952 issued 600 debentures of the value of Rs. 1,000 each in favour of the plaintiff in his business of Babulal Mohanlal. The defendant company according to the paragraph 3 of the plaint duly delivered the said debentures to the plaintiff at the plaintiff's place of business at No. 60A, Kali Krishna Tagore Road, Calcutta. The defendant company also drew Hundies for a sum of Rs. 6,00,000 in favour of the plaintiff and payable to the plaintiff in Calcutta within the same jurisdiction. The said debentures provide, inter alia, us follows:

(2.) The said debentures matured on or about 16th October, 1957 and the principal sum of Rs. 6,00,000 under the said debentures became due and payable by the defendant to the plaintiff together with Rs. 63,000 being the interest on the said principal sums. No payment was made in respect of the said debentures and the plaintiff has claimed a sum of Rs. 8,05,545 particulars of which are stated as below; <FRM> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- (a) Principal amount of the said debentures ... Rs. 6,00,000 (b) Unpaid amount of the three interest coupons ... Rs. 63,000 (c) Interest on Rs. 6,63,000 from 17th October 1957 to 11th November, 1960, at the rate of Rs. 7% per annum ... Rs. 1,42,545 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Total : ... Rs. 8,05,545 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- </FRM> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------

(3.) The plaintiff has not claimed sums due under or in respect of the said Hundies in this suit, The main defence in the written statement was that the suit should be dismissed inasmuch as the defendant company at the relevant time did not carry on any business at No. 178, Harrison Road, Calcutta as stated in the plaint and that no part of the cause of action had arisen within the original jurisdiction of the Calcutta High Court. The learned trial Judge came to the conclusion that no part of the cause of action had arisen within the original jurisdiction of this court but he held that the court had jurisdiction to decide the suit inasmuch as the defendant carried on business within the jurisdiction of the trial court at the time when the suit was filed The learned trial Judge did not, however, accept the plaintiff's claim for Rupees 1,42,545 but passed a decree for Rs. 6,63,000, interest on judgment on the principal sum of Rs. 6,00,000 and interim interest at the stipulated rate of Rs.7 % on Rs.6,00,000.