( 1 ) THE plaintiff had instituted the suit on 30. 5. 1981 for the recovery of Rs. 31,57,322. 57 against all the defendants and for the recovery of Rs. 3,08,440. 00 from defendants 17 and 18 in addition to the first relief jointly and severally and payment of interest@ 18% per annum from the date of suit till the date of realisation. There are 19 defendants in the suit. The case of the plaintiff could be stated in the following terms.

( 2 ) THE plaintiff is a Company carrying on business in Saudi Arabia and governed by the laws enforced in the Kingdom of the Saudi Arabia. The plaintiff placed two orders on 22. 11. 1978 bearing Nos. 548 of 1978 and 549 of 1978 with the first defendant for the purchase of 1000 metric tons Round bars each. The orders were placed through the agent of the first defendant in Saudi Arabia, who is called M/s. United Arab Agencies. The agent issued indents which contained the following terms and conditions:

(A) The value of each indent was U. S. $ 34,000. 00 (three lacs forty thousand), (b) All shipments were to be made within 90 days; (e) The goods were to be delivered at Hoddeidah port. (d) The payments was to be made by means of Letters of Credit to be opened by the plaintiffs in favour of Defendant No. 1 through their bankers. The plaintiff later on obtained the confirmation from the first defendant through the 5th defendant Mr. Ravi Shankar Upadhaya. The plaintiff first requested to make arrangements for opening a Letter of Credit which should be made transferable. On 23. 11. 1978 the plaintiff opened a Letter of Credit through its bankers. The at Saudi Al Francis with reference to two contracts. The first defendant was named as the beneficiary of the Letter of Credit. It was opened for U. S. $ 80,000. 00 C and F Hoddeidah Port. The Letter of Credit provided that the reimbursement was to be made by sight drafts on the Banque Del Inde Chine Et De Suez Chicago, Illinois, U. S. A. The Letter of Credit was valid upto 3. 3. 1979. The first defendant sent a telex message to the United Arab Agencies that the Letter of Credit should be amended by making a divisible so that the first defendant could arrange for the shipment of M. S. Round Bars from various suppliers on behalf of the first defendant. The first defendant assured that the shipment would be made in the month of February, 1979. 189 In the month of February, 1979 Sh. Bharat Shah of M/s. United Arab Agencies, who was the agent of the first defendant, happened to be in India and contacted the 5th defendant Mr. Ravi Shankar Upadhaya who assured Mr. Bharat Shah that the consignment was actually in Bombay Port and was in the process of being loaded into the ship. Mr. Bharat Shah returned to Jeddah. He received a telex message from Mr. Ravi Shankar Upadhaya, 5th defendant on behalf of the first defendant that on the 5th of March, 1979 a shipment of approximately 500 metric tons of M. S. Round Bars was being effected on the same day. Mr. Ravi Shankar Upadhaya, 5th defendant, came tojeddah and requested the plaintiff to extend the Letters of Credit for a further period of three months. He stated that if the Letters of Credit were extended the entire consignment would be shipped within a few days. The plaintiff insisted that if the first defendant was prepared to give 10% performance guarantee from a scheduled bank the time for Letters of Credit could be extended. The Bank guarantee was given on behalf of the 6th defendant M / s. Kupal Material and Metal Private Limited, who was not known to the plaintiff or to Mr. Bharat Shah, the agent of the first defendant. Later on, Mr. Ravi Shankar Upadhaya, the 5th defendant, gave an affidavit that the entire quantity agreed upon would be shipped within the extended period of Letters of Credit. He also agreed that if the consignment was not shipped the first defendant would reimburse the plaintiff. On the strength of the assurance given by Mr. Ravi Shankar Upadhaya on behalf of the first defenda