N. Sathish Kumar, J.

1. Aggrieved over the decree and judgment of the learned principal District Judge Thiruvallur. O.S. No. 06/2006, decreeing suit against the defendant for a sum of Rs. 9,78,319/- together with interest at 6% per annum. The defendant has preferred the present appeal.

2. For the sake of convenience the parties are referred as a plaintiff and defendant. The brief facts of the plaintiff case is as follows.

The plaintiff is a company carrying on business in transport as common carrier. The defendant is also a company carrying on business in the manufacture of elevators and other allied parts at Ayanambakkam, Ambathur Taluk. The defendant used to engage the service of the plaintiff for transporting their consignment to various places in India and in Nepal. After mutual consultations a broad agreement was arrived between the plaintiff and the defendant with reference to the rates of the freight charges, the mode of payment, the documents to be furnished by the consignor to accompany the consignment lorries, the duration of transport to various destinations, the responsibility of the transporter in respect of the consignment and other connected matters concerning the transport consignments.

3. Further in case of transport of consignment to Nepal an agreement in writing of the terms of contract for carriage for each and every consignment was entered into between the plaintiff and the defendant. The defendant are to furnish the proper documents to accompany the consignments necessary to clear several check posts enroute to the destination. The defendant also informed that the lorries would be hired for transportations by the plaintiff. Accordingly the defendant has engaged the plaintiff services for transporting the consignments to various destinations between May, 1998 and November, 1999. The above transactions the defendant are due and liable to pay a sum of Rs. 10,88,162/- towards the freight charges, a sum of Rs. 27,620/- towards other charges totalling Rs. 11,14,782/- towards the above due the defendant paid a sum of Rs. 2 lakhs on 23-11-1999. Still the defendants are due a sum of Rs. 9,14,782/-.

4. Accordingly the defendant is liable to pay the above amount together with interest at the rate of 12% per annum. It is further case of the plaintiff that the lorries carrying the consignment to Nepal were detained at Rexual Border (Nepal) for want of relevant documents. By a letter dated 22-9-1998 the plaintiff demanded the defendant to take steps to release the lorries and to pay the detention charges whereas the defendant by letter dated 24-9-1998 refused to pay the amount on the ground that Customs authorities of Nepal had not understood the issue and that the defendants had sent detailed note to the Customs authorities of Nepal. In spite of several letters to the defendant the defendant not taken any steps to pay Customs duty and also detention charges. The plaintiff has paid a sum of Rs. 3,38,288/- for clearing the consignments and lorries. The plaintiff had to incur an expenditure for defendant a sum of Rs. 3,38,288/- at Nepal Customs due to discrepancy in the documents.

5. The defendant not furnished proper documents to the plaintiff to accompany the consignments which compelled the plaintiff to incur the expenses so as to release the lorries which were detained for more than 28 days at Nepal Customs. Therefore the defendant is liable to reimburse the plaintiff of the expenditure incurred by them in the form of demurrage, etc., for an extent of Rs. 3,38,288/-. However the plaintiff claimed a sum of Rs. 3,09,689/- only. It is further case of the plaintiff that the damage to the 15 packages to the tune of Rs. 2,36,027/- is not adjustable in the amount payable by the defendant. Hence the suit for recovery of the money. Brief facts of the defendant case is as follows.

6. The defendant admitting that plaintiff was engaged in transporting the materials, stated that the materials were damaged while unloading or du