By this order it is proposed to decide an application under Order XII Rule 6 read with Section 151CPC praying for judgment on admissions made by the defendants in the pleadings and a decree in the sum of the principal amount of Rs.49,59,630.55 (Rupees Forty Nine Lacs Fifty Nine Thousand Six Hundred Thirty and Paise Fifty Five only) admitted by them.

2. The plaintiff has filed the instant suit for the recovery of Rs.1,18,03,920/- (Rupees One Crore Eighteen Lacs Three Thousand Nine Hundred Twenty only), which represents the principal amount of Rs.49,59,630.55 (Rupees Forty Nine Lacs Fifty Nine Thousand Six Hundred Thirty and Paise Fifty Five only) and interest of Rs.68,44,289/- (Rupees Sixty Eight Lacs Forty Four Thousand Two Hundred Eighty Nine only) on account of refund of the excess amount deposited by the plaintiff with the defendant No.2 in the account of the defendant No.1 in the following circumstances.

3. The State Trading Corporation of India (in short the STC) sometime in the month of July, 1995 received an export order from NFA, Philippines for the export of 25000 M.Ts of rice. The STC in order to effect these supplies, entered into an Agreement with the plaintiff for the due performance and execution of the said export order received by the STC to the extent of 13 M.Ts of rice. As per the terms and conditions of the Agreement, the plaintiff was to lift the rice from the defendant No.2, the Food Corporation of India (in short the FCI). For the said purpose, the defendant No.1 handed over to the plaintiff the release orders issued by the defendant No.2 in favour of the defendant No.1 duly endorsed in favour of the plaintiff. It was one of the conditions of the performance of the Contract that the plaintiff would make the full payment of the release order to the defendant No.1 before lifting the rice from the defendant No.2. In compliance with the said terms and conditions, the plaintiff made full advance payment and despatched the goods to Philippines in terms of the export order, except 769.009 M.Ts. Thus, it appears that the entire quantity of rice was not lifted. The quantity of rice which was not lifted was 769.009 M.Ts, though for this quantity also, the plaintiff had paid the money. The plaintiff accordingly claimed the refund of the excess amount paid by the plaintiff for the aforesaid quantity amounting to Rs.49,59,630.55 Rupees Forty Nine Lacs Fifty Nine Thousand Six Hundred Thirty and Paise Fifty Five only) and the present suit for recovery was filed, impleading both the STC and the FCI as the defendants.

4. At this juncture, it may be noticed that the plaintiff before filing of the present suit, requested the STC for making refund of the excess amount paid by the plaintiff to the defendant No.2. The STC, in turn, entered into a correspondence with the FCI and at some point of time the FCI appears to have agreed to refund Rs.32.33 lacs (Rupees Thirty Two Lacs and Thirty Three Thousand only) to the STC, provided that the STC gave an indemnity bond to bear the losses to the FCI. The STC having failed to furnish the indemnity bond, as demanded by the FCI, the amount claimed by the plaintiff was finally not given by the FCI to the STC.

.5. Both the STC and the FCI contested the suit by filing their detailed written statements. The STC in its written statement admitted the execution of the Agreement entered into between the STC and the plaintiff and that the plaintiff had made the payment for the entire quantity of rice to be lifted in terms of the Contract between the parties. The STC submitted that the STC

.as soon as it got the release orders from the FCI, endorsed the same to the plaintiff for taking the delivery of the rice for the purpose of export to NFA, Philippines. The plaintiff, after taking the delivery from the defendant No.2, was to process and repack the goods to make them export worthy. The quantity of 769.009 M.Ts of rice was not lifted by the plaintiff, although the payment was