R.N.Pyne, J. - (1.) This appeal is directed against an order dated 27th Aug., 1979 of Mrs. Khastgir, J. dismissing the appellant's application for revocation of leave granted under Clause 12 of the Letters Patent to institute the Suit No. 906 of 1978 (Ram Chand Khosla v. State of Bihar). The facts out of which the said application in the Court of the first instance arose are briefly as follows : Ram Chand Khosla, the plaintiff in Suit No. 906 of 1979 (1978?) was appointed as Receiver by and under a consent decree dated 5th April, 1977 passed in Suit No. 587 of 1973 (Universal Engineers and Traders v. Premier Traders) by this Court for the purpose of collecting and realising the dues payable to Premier Traders and was empowered to bring suit for that purpose.
(2.) Pursuant to the power conferred under the said decree Ramchand Khosla as plaintiff filed the said suit being Suit No. 906 of 1978 against State of Bihar and the appellant, inter alia, for recovery of Rupees 4,46,576.40 p. and other reliefs. The plaintiff's case in the plaint is as follows : Pursuant to an order dated 21st April, 1973 placed by the defendant No. 1, State of Bihar with the said Messrs. Premier Traders, Exhibition Road, Patna 300 pumping sets were sold by the said Premier Traders (hereinafter referred to as 'the said firm') to the defendant No. 1 and out of the same, 200 pumping sets were supplied to District Agricultural Officer at Muzaffarpur and 100 Pumping sets were supplied to the Sub-Divisional Officer at Sitamari as instructed by the State of Bihar. In the said order it is mentioned that the appellant is the consignee and payment is to be made by it. The appellant at the instance of the State of Bihar (respondent No. 2 herein) from time to time made part payments to the said firm of Messrs. Premier Traders aggregating to Rs. 5,93,249.75. p. leaving a balance of Rupees 2,54,250.25 p. on account of price of the said goods. Tn terms of the said order the said firm deposited with the respondent No. 2 a sum of Rs. 16,950/- as and by way of security. According to the plaintiff in Suit No, 906 of 1979 (1978?) as Receiver he was authorised to collect the dues of the said firm of Premier Traders and as a result thereof there was due and owing by the defendants in the said suit a sum of Rs. 4,46,576.50 p. including the sum of Rs. 16,950/- the amount of security deposit and the sum of Rupees 1,75,376.15 p. being the amount of interest at the rate of 12% from 10th July, 1973 to 30th Nov., 1978. Here it may be mentioned that in the letter dated 24th May, 1973 addressed by the said firm to the Deputy Secretary, Department of Agricultural and Animal Husbandry (Agriculture) Govt. of Bihar, Patna, relating to the transaction it is stated 'Subject to Patna Jurisdiction'.
(3.) It was alleged that the defendants in the said suit though expressly admitted and acknowledged the amount due and payable to the said firm of Premier Traders yet withheld the payment of the sum of Rupees 4,46,576.50 p. to the plaintiff in the said suit. Further, at a meeting of the Receiver appointed by an order dated January 3, 1974 passed in the said Suit No. 587 of 1973 held at Bar Library Club, Calcutta on Jan. 24, 1974 one Mr. D. P. Srivastava the authorised agent and representative of the defendant No. 2 (i. e., appellant herein) acknowledged for and on behalf of the defendant No. 2 the liability of the defendant No. 2 and the dues of the said Premier Traders and promised to pay the said amount to the said Receiver appointed in the said suit after observing all rules and regulations of the orders placed on the said firm. It was further alleged that by letters the defendants in the said Suit No. 906 of 1979 (1978 ?) admitted and acknowledged their liability in respect of the plaintiff's dues.;