Vikramajit Sen, J.

( 1 ) THE question that arises at this stage of the proceedings is whether the ex parte ad interim injunction orders passed should be confirmed and whether a Receiver ought to be appointed in respect of the suit property.

( 2 ) AT the first hearing it had been observed by this Court that the plaintiff had supplied the machinery and equipment under the two Hire Purchase agreements dated 26th March, 1993 and 30th July, 1993. Under the said agreements the plaintiff delivered the machinery and equipment as detailed in paragraph 6 of the plaint. The total hire-purchase value of the machinery and equipment in the first agreement was fixed at Rs. 34,30,892/ -. The defendant paid a sum of Rs. 3,00,646/- as earnest money and agreed to pay the balance amount in 13 instalments. Similarly, the total hire-purchase value of the machinery and equipment in the second agreement was fixed at Rs. 21,56,039/- and the defendant No. 1 paid a sum of Rs. 1,88,931/- as earnest money and the balance was agreed to be paid in 13 instalments. In terms of clause 2 (v) of the said Agreements the dejure possession of the property always remained with the plaintiff; and defendant No. 1 was only entitled to use the property at its factory premises. After the payments enumerated above, defendant No. 1 defaulted in payment of the instalments. A request was made for extension of time for completing the payment. On the failure of the defendants in making payment the plaintiff also served a legal notice terminating the Hire Purchase Agreements. An offer was made by the defendants for a onetime settlement which was refused by the plaintiffs. It is sated that the defendants are likely to sell the machines, equipments and the mortgaged properties and if this were to happen, the plaintiff shall suffer irreparable loss and would not be able to recover the same or the value thereof.

( 3 ) A reading of Clause 2 (v) of the Hire Purchase Agreements leaves no possibility for doubt that the property in question remains in the ownership of the plaintiff and changes hands only on the completion of the payments envisaged in the Hire Purchase Agreements. Clause 2 (v) reads as under: if the hirer shall make default in payment of any sum herein provided as and when the same shall have become due or shall fail to observe and perform any of the terms and Conditions of this agreement or if the Hirer shall be adjudicated insolvent or has any receiving order or any other order under an Insolvency Act and made against him or he wound up whether voluntarily or otherwise or if execution shall be levied or threatened to be levied upon the said property or upon any premises where the said property may be or upon the hirer s effect for rent, rates or taxes or if the execution shall be levied upon the hire s effect or if the hirer shall allow any judgment against him remain unsatisfied then and in each and every such case the owner shall forthwith become entitled to immediate possession of the hired property, (the "de jure" possession shall always remain with the owner and the hirer being only entitled to work the said property in terms of this Agreement) and the owner may

(A) without prejudice to any claim for arrears of hire rent or damages for breach of this Agreement forthwith and without notice or demand terminate the hiring and retake possession of the property and/or;

(B) by written notice either served personally on the hirer or sent by post or otherwise to the hirer or to his last known address forthwith for all purposes absolutely determine this Agreement and the hiring hereby constituted and thereupon the hirer shall no longer be in possession of the property with the owners, consent nor shall either party thereafter have any rights under this Agreement, but such determination shall not discharge any pre-existing liability of the hirer to the owners, and the hirer shall not be entitled to claim any damages, compensation for such termination of the agreement and taki

Click Here to Read the rest of this document