Rajiv Sahai Endlaw, J.

1. The two plaintiffs have instituted this suit on 27th March, 2010 for recovery of damages in the sums of US$ 8,69,387.67 equal to Rs.4,02,00,486/- with pendente lite and future interest jointly and severally from the five defendants.

2. Summons of the suit were issued and a joint written statement has been filed by the defendants and to which a replication has been filed by the plaintiffs. The parties were referred to the Mediation Cell of this Court, which remained unsuccessful. The parties have filed affidavits of admission / denial of each other’s documents.

3. The suit was listed on 28th March, 2014 for framing of issues. While the counsel for the plaintiffs did not propose any issues, the senior counsel for the defendants handed over proposed issues including on the aspect of limitation. Perusal of the pleadings for the purposes of framing of issues having prima facie shown the suit to be barred by time, the counsels were heard on the said aspect and orders reserved with the observations that if the suit is held to be within time, issues shall be framed.

4. The case in the plaint is:-

(i) that the plaintiff no.1 is the proprietor and the CEO of the plaintiff no.2 Mehta Entertainment Inc. incorporated under the laws of United States of America;

(ii) that the plaintiffs are engaged in organizing and promoting entertainment shows all over the world, either of their own or in association with other organizers;

(iii) that the defendants no.2 to 4 Mr. Suresh Mohan Uberoi, Smt. Yashodhara Uberoi and Ms. Megha Uberoi are the Directors of the defendant no.1 Company and are as such jointly and severally liable for the dealings of the defendant no.1 Company; the defendant no.5 Mr. Vivek Oberoi is the son of the defendants no.2 and 3 and brother of the defendant no.4 and had authorized the defendant no.1 Company to deal on his behalf and to receive payments on his behalf;

(iv) that the plaintiffs upon receipt of specific confirmation from the defendants that the defendant no.5 is willing to participate in the shows scheduled to be held in August / September, 2003 in good faith and belief and upon receipt of request from Mr. Farhath Hussain (not a party to the suit) remitted a total contractual amount of US$ 3,00,000/- in the account mentioned by the defendants, for the said shows; the said contractual amount was then remitted to the defendants;

(v) that though all the arrangements were made for the shows scheduled to be held in August and September, 2003 but the defendants could not keep their contractual obligations and failed to ensure the participation of the defendant no.5 in the said shows on the ground of his injuries and physical fitness;

(vi) even thereafter the defendants, on one pretext or the other avoided and were not able to ensure the participation of the defendant no.5 in other shows for which the plaintiffs had made their best efforts;

(vii) that because of non-compliance by the defendants of their contractual obligations, the plaintiffs suffered huge losses and bad name;

(viii) that the plaintiffs have been requesting and persuading the defendants to ensure participation of the defendants no.5 in the subsequent shows or to return the amount paid by the plaintiffs to the defendants but all the efforts went futile till end of 2005 and which compelled the plaintiffs to write a letter dated 7th January, 2006 to the defendants for settling the long outstanding dues;

(ix) that the plaintiffs ultimately issued a legal demand notice dated 18th January, 2006 for refund of the amount along with interest totaling US$ 3,90,000/-;

(x) that the defendants vide their reply dated 2nd February, 2006, though admitted the receipt of contractual amount of US$ 3,00,000/- on 31st January, 2003 but doubted the contract dated 29th January, 2003 with the plaintiffs for shows to be held in August / September, 2003 and also asked for proofs of the same because the amount was remitted on the instructions o