1. This is a suit filed by the plaintiff against the defendant for recovery of Rs.20,19,699/- with pendente lite and future interest @ 24% p.a.

2. Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that the plaintiff is a Government company and the suit has been filed through its Executive Director, Shri P.S.Gupta. The plaintiff appointed the defendant as its consignment agent vide letter dated 27.5.1985 for a period of 11 months starting from 2.5.1985 to 31.3.1986. The defendant, as per the terms of the Consignment Agency Agreement, was required to deposit a sum of Rs.3 lacs as security with the plaintiff which was to carry interest @ 12% p.a. and the interest so accrued was to be adjusted annually against the supplies made. In further terms of the Consignment Agency Agreement, the defendant was required to raise and make invoices on customers in defendants own name on behalf of the plaintiff in respect of the goods sold by the defendant and was made responsible to pay the plaintiff full value of such invoices on due date notwithstanding the realization of the price from its customers.

3. The defendant, during the continuance of Consignment Agency Agreement, was allowed to make payment for the materials supplied to the defendant within 55 days in case of dispatches made through road and 65 days in case of dispatches made through rail, from the date of dispatch of the material from Korba and/or Bidhan Bagh Unit and the cheques were to be deposited by the defendant in such a manner so as to get credit of the same in the account on due dates.

4. According to the statement of account filed along with the suit, an amount of Rs.11,67,853/-, after adjusting the security amount of Rs.3 lacs, was outstanding against the defendant. It is alleged that the defendant was also liable to pay interest @ 24% p.a. and an amount of Rs.6,43,015/- has been claimed on account of interest upto 30.6.1988. An amount of Rs.2,08,831/- has also been claimed on account of interest for delay in payment made after the scheduled date. As such, a total sum of Rs.20,19,699/- has been claimed by the plaintiff against the defendant, which includes interest upto the date of filing of the suit.

5. In response to the summons of the suit, the defendant has filed its written statement. The defendant has disputed the territorial jurisdiction of the Court to entertain the present suit. It is stated that neither any cause of action arose in favour of the plaintiff in the jurisdiction of this Court nor the defendant either resides or works for gain within the territorial limits of this Court. As per the defendant, the contract of agency was concluded at Bombay and the offer of appointment of agency was also made by the plaintiff to the defendant from its office at Bombay. It is, therefore, alleged that this Court lacks territorial jurisdiction to try the present suit.

6. The defendant has also disputed that the suit has been signed, verified or filed by a competent person on behalf of the plaintiff. It is denied that Shri P.S.Gupta, through whom this suit has been filed, is the Executive Director (Commercial) and a senior officer of the plaintiff company. The authority of Mr.P.S.Gupta to sign, verify and institute the suit has been questioned by the defendant.

7. The defendant has denied its liability to pay any interest. It is stated that there was no agreement between the parties that the defendant would be required to pay interest on the delayed payment. The statement of account filed by the plaintiff along with the suit has also been disputed by the defendant. The defendant has denied the entitlement of the plaintiff to claim the alleged principal amount or the interest claimed in the suit. The defendant has filed its statement of account maintained by it in the regular course of business along with its written statement and relying on its statement of account, the defendant has stated that it is the plaintiff who is liable to pay a sum of