HASTINGS MILLS LTD Vs. HIRA SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this application on which the above Rule had been issued the petitioner has prayed for committal of the respondents for contempt. The contempt alleged is claimed to be criminal contempt, and as such, this application had been moved on a prior consent being had of the Learned Advocate General under Section 15(1)(b) of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 (hereinafter referred t as the said Act).

(2.) The petitioner is a company incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956, and claims to be carrying on business under the name and style of Sree Ram Silk Manufacturing Company as its sole proprietor. Respondent Nos.1 to 7 are said to be closely related to each other. Sm. Budhvanti, respondent No.5 is the wife of respondent No.1 Hira Singh whose sons are Harbhajan, Joginder and Monmohan, respondent Nos.2, 3 and 4 respectively, Sm. Nand Kaur respondent No.6 is the wife of Harbhajan and Sm. Jasbir Kaur, respondent No.7 is the wife of Joginder. The respondent Nos.8, 9, 10 and 11 are the partnership firms carried on by some or other of the respondent Nos.1 to 7 carrying on business under the names and styles of Anand Silk Stores, Anand Agencies, Anand & Company and Sher-E-Punjab Silk Stores respectively.

(3.) Facts leading to the present application for contempt shortly are : The petitioner appointed respondent No.8 Anand Silk Stores as its del credere agent for the States of Punjab, Haryana, Himachal Pradesh, Jammu and Kashmir and Delhi for the sale of its silk and synthetic products. As such an agent the respondent No.8 from time to time introduced various customers including respondent Nos.9, 10 and 11 to whom the petitioner from time to time sold and delivered large quantities of its products. The petitioner, however, not being paid the price of the goods so sold and delivered it had to institute several suits for recovery of the unpaid price of the goods so sold and delivered. In each of these suits, respondent No.8, Anand Silk Stores was made a party defendant since the said respondent as the del credere agent is liable to pay the unpaid price of the goods sold and delivered through their agency. All these suits were instituted in the Court of the learned Subordinate Judge, Chinsurah, and these suits include: - (1) Money Suit No.10 of 1974 where the defendants are Sher-E-Punjab Silk Stores, respondent No.11 and Anand Silk Stores, respondent No.8, (2) Money Suit No.11 of 1974 where the defendants are Messrs Anand Agencies, respondent No.9 and Anand Silk Stores, respondent No.8 and (3) Money Suit No.18 of 1974 where the defendants are Messrs. Anand & Company, respondent No.10 and Anand Silk Stores, respondent No.8. Most of these suits were filed between July and December 174 and the above three suits were filed respectively on July 16, 1974, July 16, 1974 and October 1, 1974.