JAYTEE EXPORTS Vs. NATWAR PAREKH INDUSTRIES LIMITED

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Court: The aforesaid applications were heard together for convenience sake. The first mentioned application is demurer action taken out by the defendant No. l for revoking leave obtained by the plaintiff under clause 12 of the Letters Patent for instituting the aforesaid suit in this Hon'ble Court or in any event the order may be made for revoking leave obtained by the plaintiff as against the aforesaid defendant: and rejection of the plaint, filed now, and dismissing the same and in any event rejecting the plaint dismissing the above suit as against the petitioner. The second mentioned application has been taken out by the plaintiff for Judgment on admission for a sum of Rs. 27.12.000/- against the defendant No. 1 with interest at the rate of 15% per annum from 22nd August, 1998 till date of the payment.

(2.) I thought the demurer action should be considered and decided first as the result thereof would obviously have inevitable legal implication on the application for Judgment on admission.

(3.) It is contended that the suit is barred by law for getting the plaint rejected. No part of the cause of action arose within the jurisdiction and the suit is also barred by laws of limitation. Learned counsel for the first defendant contends that the suit is barred under section 230 of the Contract Act as going by the statements and averments of the plaint it will appear that the defendant No.l is described as agent of the disclosed principal, defendant No.4, in the suit. The first defendant issued and signed Bill of Lading dated 15th January, 1998, acting as agent of the defendant No. 4 who is the carrier of the goods covered by the Bill of Lading, that were received by it. As such, when the principal, being defendant No. 4, is disclosed, the defendant No. 1 could not be sued. In support of this contention the learned counsel has sought reliance on a decision of this Court reported in AIR 2002 Cal 211.