MANMOHAN SINGH, J.

1. The plaintiff has filed a suit for recovery of Rs.20,38,766/- along with pendente lite and future interest @ 18% per annum.

2. Brief facts as per pleadings are that the plaintiff was appointed as an Executive Secretary to Dr. Naresh Trehan, who was the Executive Director with defendant No.1-company on retainership basis by letter dated 16th July, 1999 on a retainer fee of Rs.40,000/- per month. In terms of the Agreement of retainer, the plaintiff was required to coordinate various activities and was to take instructions from the Executive Director or whomsoever he designates.

3. The said retainer fee was enhanced from time to time, the details are given as under:-

a) The retainer fee of the plaintiff was enhanced by defendant No.1 to Rs.44,000/- per month by letter dated 18th August, 2000.

b) It was further enhanced to Rs.48,500/- vide letter dated 23rd June, 2001. In addition, the plaintiff was further rewarded with an allowance/benefit of Rs.1,80,000/- per annum vide letter dated 23rd June, 2001. The retainer fee was further enhanced to Rs.54,000/- on 19th September, 2002 and Rs.60,000/- on 6th March, 2004. The allowance/benefit was further increased to Rs.2,00,000/- per annum vide letter dated 6th March, 2004. Certain conditions were also enumerated in the letter of appointment dated 19th September, 2002, as defendant No.1 also agreed to pay commission of Rs.2,65,000/- in addition to the retainer fee vide letter dated 22nd September, 2005.

c) On 28th March, 2007, defendant No.1 was again to extend the retainership of the plaintiff from 1st April, 2007 to 31st March, 2008. Besides increasing the monthly retainer fee to Rs.90,000/-, the commission was also increased to Rs.3,87,000/- per annum. The letter specifically mentioned that the retainership fee was in pursuance to the terms and conditions laid down in letter dated 19th September, 2002. The defendant No.1 further revised the offer by its letter dated 15th May, 2007 whereby the commission was enhanced to Rs.5,67,000/- per annum. The rest of the terms and conditions were as per the letter dated 19th September, 2002.

4. The plaintiff received a letter dated 18th May, 2007 terminating the arrangement with the plaintiff with immediate effect.

5. It is the case of the plaintiff that the said action of the defendants was unilateral and illegal in terminating the services of the plaintiff without any reason and was in violation of the letters dated 28th March, 2007 and 15th May, 2007. The plaintiff thereafter sent a legal notice dated 30.06.2007 issued to defendant No.1 claiming the retainership fee payable from 1st April, 2007 to 31st March, 2008 alongwith the commission and other dues. In the meanwhile, the defendant No.1 by its letter dated 21st May, 2007 provided the statement of full and final dues and vide letter dated 22nd May, 2007 sent two cheques bearing No.289441 dated 3rd May, 2007 and bearing No.289441 dated 3rd May, 2007 and bearing 289459 dated 21st May, 2007 for Rs.1,29,580/- and Rs.6,07,508/- respectively i.e. the amount due to the plaintiff towards his outstanding dues upto 18th May, 2007 and other dues covering payment of 162 days earned leaves without taking into consideration amount of commission. The said payments were received by the plaintiff under protest and without prejudice to his rights under the retainership arrangement as per the case of the plaintiff.

6. The plaintiff thereupon sent another letter dated 17th November, 2007 demanded his outstanding payment for the unexpired period of retainership from 19th May, 2007 to 31st March, 2008. As the defendant failed to pay the said amount of Rs.20,38,766/- i.e. liquidate its liability, hence the plaintiff has filed the suit for recovery of the said amount.

7. The defendants filed their written statement wherein they stated that the plaintiff by way of this suit is seeking to enforce the contract which was between the plaintiff and defendant No.1, moreover, the termination