BASUDEO RAMGOVIND Vs. VACHHA & CO.
LAWS(BOM)-1954-8-11
HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY
Decided on August 05,1954

Basudeo Ramgovind Appellant
VERSUS
Vachha And Co. Respondents


Cited Judgements :-

MATUBHAI JAMEITRAM VS. CUSTODIAN OF EVACUEE PROPERTY BOMBAY [LAWS(BOM)-1957-10-18] [REFERRED TO]
ARVIND N. SAVANI VS. MAGANLAL SAVANI [LAWS(BOM)-2012-9-20] [REFERRED TO]
STATE BANK OF INDIA VS. VISWANATHA NIRYATH (P) LTD [LAWS(KER)-1994-2-55] [REFERRED TO]
T.UMESWARAN VS. CHINNARAJU [LAWS(MAD)-2019-4-732] [REFERRED TO]


JUDGEMENT

- (1.)ONE Satyanarayanlal (plaintiff), who was carrying on business as a carpet merchant at Bhadohi in Banares filed a suit against Basudeo (defendant) to recover Rs. 35,000 odd in respect of certain consignments of carpets supplied by him to the defendant at Bombay. The defendant by his written statement admitted a sum of RS. 6,000.
2. On January 10, 1960, the plaintiff took cut a summons for attachment before Judgment, and the property of the defendant, including certain carpets, was attached. On March 8, 1950, an order was made in chambers by Bhagwati J. raising the attachment, the relevant portion of which was as follows:

'I do by and with such consent order that upon the Defendant depositing in Court a sum of Rs. 5,000 on or before the 10th day of March 1950 to the credit of this suit and hereby further undertaking to hand over to the Court Receiver appointed Receiver herein as hereafter provided the carpets mentioned in List 'B' hereto by way of security for the Plaintiff's claim in suit.....And I do by and with such consent further order that the said Receiver be and he is hereby at liberty to sell the said carpets from time to time at the best rates with the consent of both the parties hereto or by order of this Hon'ble Court and I do by and with such consent further order that the said. Receiver do retain the net sale proceeds of thesaid carpets. In his hands and when the aggregate amount of the said net sale proceeds after deducting his costs, charges and expenses and commission comes to Rs. 8,000 or more the said Receiver to retain in his hands out of such net sale proceeds a sum of Rs. 8,000 to the credit of the above suit and do pay the excess of the net sale proceeds over the said sum of Rs. 8,000 and deliver the unsold carpets if any to the Defendant Immediately thereafter....'

3. Pursuant to this order the defendant deposited in Court the sum of Rs. 5,000. On December 11, 1950, a consent order was taken out by the parties for discharging the Receiver, the relevant portion of which was as follows:

'.....Upon hearing Messrs. Vachha and Co.,attorneys for the Plaintiff who state that Seth Jaigopal Gangabishan has by his letter dated 28th November 1950 guaranteed payment to the Plaintiff of the amount of the Decree that may be passed against the Defendant in the above suit to the extent of Rs. 8,000 over and above the sum of Rs. 5,000 deposited in Court to the credit of the above suit the parties here have agreed that the Receiver appointed herein to take charge of the 145 carpets pursuant to the said consent order should be discharged.'

4. Before the plaintiff's suit came on for hearing, the plaintiff's attorneys, Vachha and Co. (applicants), and the defendant's attorneys, Benjamin and Co., received a letter dated September 23, 1953, signed by the plaintiff and the defendant to say that they had entered into an agreement to settle the suit. The agreement which was annexed to the letter was in the following terms:

'This agreement made at Bombay this 23rd day of September 1953 between Satyanarayanlal Mahavirprasad Gupta (the sole proprietor of Carpet Museum of Bhadohi, Dist. Benares) hereinafter called the first party and Basudeo Ramgovind Misra (the sole proprietor of Misra Carpet Co., Bombay) hereinafter called the second party. Whereas the first party used to send carpets to the second party on consignment basis and had an account between the parties in respect of the aforesaid dealings. The first party was claiming from the second party about Rs. 36,000 (Rupees thirty -six thousand only) the second party disputed this liability to the first party about that alleged claim. Thereupon the first party filed a suit in the High Court of Judicature at Bombay against the second party being suit No. 36 of 1950. In the said suit a sum of Rs. 5,000 (Rupees five thousand only) were deposited by the second party in Court to the credit of the above suit and gave surety of Seth Sitaram Jaygopal for the sum of Rs. 8,000 (Rupees eight thousand only). At the request of both the parties Seth Narayandas intervened and brought about the settlement between the parties on the following terms and thus above suit is settled between the parties as follows:
The second party to pay to the first party the sum of Rs. 14,500 (Rupees Fourteen thousand five hundred only) in full settlement of the claim of the first party against the second party in the said suit No. 36 of 1950.
(2.)THE second party has this day paid to the first party the said sum of Rs. 14,500 (Rupees fourteen thousand five hundred only) as follows: (a) Rs. 12,800 (Rupees twelve thousand eight hundred only) in cash through the said Seth Narayandas. (b) Rs. 1,700 (Rupees seventeen hundred only) by pledging four sets of ornaments containing about twenty four tolas of gold a list where of is hereto annexed as Ex. 'A' by way of security of Rs. 1,100. The second partyagrees to repay to the first party the said sum of Rs. 1,700 within six months from the date hereof and the first party on payment of the said sum by the second party to return the said ornaments to the second party.
The first party has agreed and undertaken to get the said suit No. 36 of 1950 dismissed in Court for non -appearance of the parties immediately on the signing of this agreement and has also agreed to Inform his solicitor to act accordingly Immediately on signing of this term.

(3.)SAVE as aforesaid neither party has any claim against the other.


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