P.T. ANKLESARIA Vs. UNION OF INDIA
LAWS(BOM)-1972-11-8
HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY
Decided on November 29,1972

P.T. Anklesaria Appellant
VERSUS
UNION OF INDIA Respondents

JUDGEMENT

NAIN,J. - (1.) THE plaintiffs in suit No. 432 of 1967 apply that the said suit and suit No. 295 of 1970 should be consolidated under the provisions of Section 151, Civil Procedure Code. The application is opposed both by the defendants in suit No. 432 of 1967 as well as by the defendants No. 6 in suit No. 295 of 1970.
(2.) THE plaintiffs in suit No. 432 of 1967 are Messrs P.T. Anklesaria and Co., a partnership firm. The defendants are the Union of India. Under an agreement dated December 28, 1962, the plaintiffs agreed to clear and handle foodgrains, fertilizers, gunny and twine bales imported by the Central Government at the Port of Bombay and to transport such quantities thereof as may be required from docks to the Central Government godowns or rail -heads in Bombay etc. The suit has been filed for recovery of an aggregate sum of Rs. 42,11,688.30. The major claim of the plaintiffs may be divided into two parts. The plaintiffs claim that under the agreement dated December 28, 1962, they had not agreed to handle fertilizers imported by the Central Government in bulk, though they had agreed to handle fertilizers imported in bags. At the request of the Government the plaintiffs handle fertilizers imported in bulk. The plaintiffs contend that the agreed rates for handling bulk -wheat sought to be applied by the Government do not apply to handling fertilizers imported in bulk. The plaintiffs claim reasonable market rates in respect of handling fertilizers in bulk. Another major head of the claim of the plaintiffs is that at the time the agreement dated December 28, 1962 was entered into, a Scheme called the Bombay Unregistered Dock Workers (Regulation of Employment) Scheme, 1957, was in operation in the Port of Bombay with regard to dock workers of the classes specified in the Schedule to the said Scheme, and that the said Scheme did not cover workers employed in clearing foodgrains. The plaintiffs contend that the said Scheme was made applicable to the foodgrains workers with effect from June 17, 1963 by a Notification issued by the Central Government. The plaintiffs contend that consequent on the extension of the said Scheme to dock workers employed in clearing foodgrains, there was a go -slow strike from April 14, 1964 and consequently the costs of handling foodgrains by the plaintiffs went up. The plaintiffs claim from the defendants higher rates for handling foodgrains than were provided for in the agreement. The defendants who are the Union of India have filed a Written Statement and a Set -off in suit No. 432 of 1967. In the Written Statement they deny the claims of the plaintiffs and further contend that the defendants are entitled to recover sums aggregating to Rs. 18,89,834.19 from the plaintiffs. According to the defendants, only a sum of Rs. 9,18,476.21 was due and payable by the defendants to the plaintiffs. The defendants claim to have deducted this amount from their own claim of Rs. 18,89,834.19 against the plaintiffs leaving a sum of Rs. 9;71,357.98 due by the plaintiffs to the defendants. It appears that under the agreement this plaintiffs had deposited cash security in the sum of Rs. 2 lakhs with the defendants. The said security was later substituted by the Government bonds of the same value. Under the terms of the agreement the plaintiffs were to furnish further security in the sum of Rs. 8 lakhs. The said amount was guaranteed by the All India General Insurance Co. Ltd., defendants No. 6 in suit No. 295 of 1970. According to the defendants after appropriating the security deposit of Rs. 2 lakhs there was still due and outstanding a sum of Rs. 7,71,357.98 by the plaintiffs to the defendants and that the said All India General Insurance Co. Ltd., was also liable to the defendants for the said amount. In the Written Statement and Set -off filed by the defendants, the defendants have contended that nothing is due by the defendants to the plaintiffs and on the contrary a sum of Rs. 7,71,357.98 was due by the plaintiffs to the defendants in respect of which they have filed a separate suit.
(3.) SUIT No. 295 of 1970 has been filed by the Union of India for recovery of a sum of Rs. 7,19,017.85 out of the said sum of Rs. 7,71,357.98 after giving defendants No. 1 some further credit. Defendants No. 1 are Messrs. P.T. Anklesaria and Co, who are the plaintiffs in suit No. 432 of 1967. Defendants Nos. 2 to 5 are the partners of the said firm. Defendants No. 6, All India General Insurance Co. Ltd., are the guarantors. In the Written Statement filed in the said suit No. 295 of 1970 by defendants No. 6, the said defendants No. 6 state that defendants No. 1 Messrs. P.T. Anklesaria and Co. have filed a suit against the Union of India, being suit No. 432 of 1967, for a decree in the sum of Rs. 42,11,688.30 and that defendants No. 1 Messrs. P.T. Anklesaria and Co. had rightly repudiated their liability to the plaintiffs the Union of India. Defendants No. 6 further contend that they are not liable to the plaintiffs Union of India until suit No. 432 of 1967 is decided and the liability of defendants Nos. 1 to 5, the partners of Messrs. Anklesaria and Co., is determined in the said suit. Defendants No. 6 also deny that there is now due and payable by the said defendants Nos. 1 to 5 to the plaintiffs Union of India as alleged the said sum of Rs. 7,19,017.85 or any part thereof. One of the issues proposed by defendants No. 6 is 'whether any amount was due to the plaintiffs from defendants Nos. 1 to 5 as alleged in para. 8 of the plaint.';


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.