BIMAL CHANDRA BASAK, J.

( 1 ) THIS appeal arises out of an order passed on the 3rd Dec. 1985 by the Trial Court in an application for interlocutory order filed by the plaintiff-appellant herein. On or about 19th Nov. 1985 the suit was filed by the plaintiff-appellant against the defendants respondents praying for the following reliefs :- (a) Decree for Rs. 9,25,020. 80p. against the defendants 1 and 2. (b) Interim interest and interest on judgment; (c) Alternatively, an enquiry into the loss and damages suffered by the plaintiff and a decree for such sum as may be found due upon such enquiry; (d) Perpetual injunction restraining the defendant 3 from invoking and/or receiving any payment under the Letters of Indemnity/guarantee dated 26th June, 1985 given by the defendant No. 4. (e) Perpetual injunction restraining the defendant No. 4 from making any payment and/or disbursing any money to the defendant 3 under the Letters of Indemnity/guarantee dt. 26th June, 1985; (f) Such other injunction as would afford adequate relief to the plaintiff; (g) Receiver; (h) Attachment; (i) Costs; (j) Such further or other reliefs. The defendant 1 is a company carrying on business at Singapore. The defendant 2 is the agent in India of defendant 1. The defendant 3 is the shipping company which brought the goods to the Port of Calcutta. The defendant 4 is Allahabad Bank which executed four documents in favour of the defendant 3 which are the subject matter of dispute in the Appeal. As the said documents have been sometimes describes as Guarantee, sometimes as Indemnity and sometimes as both by the plaintiff-appellant and as there is much dispute between the parties regarding the actual nature of the said documents, we shall hereinafter refer to the same as the said instruments. We shall refer to the relevant facts of this case so far as they are relevant for the purpose of disposal of this Appeal and in the light of the ultimate order sought to be passed by us.

( 2 ) ACCORDING to the plaint, in April 1985 there was an agreement by and between the plaintiff-appellant and the defendant 1 through the defendant 2 for sale to the plaintiff of 100 M. T. of High Density Polythelene Powder (hereinafter referred to as HDPE) on certain terms and conditions. We should point out that though in the plaint and the petition it is stated by the plaintiff that it was agreed that the goods shall be of Grade 5202, this is disputed by the defendants-respondents according to whom 5202 was merely the marking but it was not a part of the agreement that the goods were to be of Grade 5202. The plaintiff states that accordingly the plaintiff opened a Letter of Credit in favour of the defendant 1 which was duly communicated to the defendant 1. The defendant 1 shipped from Singapore on board "ganges Pioneer" 100 M. T. HDPE granules in four containers of 25 M. T. each covered by four Bills of Lading all dt. 30th May, 1985 and issued on behalf of the owners of the said vessel. According to the plaintiff the said vessel arrived at the Port of Calcutta on the 5th June, 1985 and discharged the goods covered by the said Bills of Lading. The complaint of the plaintiff is that for negotiating the said letter of credit, the defendant 1 was to send to the defendant 4, that is, the Allahabad Bank the original documents which included Bills of Lading etc. so that upon retirement of the documents the plaintiff could take delivery of the goods but that the defendant 1 did not send the same. It is alleged that the plaintiff could not take delivery of the goods because of non-furnishing of such original documents. It is alleged that the plaintiff had sold the goods on high seas basis to its customer and that it had agreed to hand over the documents to its customer by 12th June, 1985 for taking delivery of the goods but because of default on the part of the defendant 1, the plaintiff was unable to hand over the original documents and the plaintiffs customer cancelled the said order. It is

Click Here to Read the rest of this document