Agarwal Coal Corporation Pvt. Ltd. , Rep. by its Authorised Signatory, Shailendra Singh vs Ind Barath Thermal Power Ltd. , Rep. by its Managing Director, Chennai

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2021 Supreme(Mad) 1317

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
G. JAYACHANDRAN, J.
M/s. Agarwal Coal Corporation Pvt.Ltd., Rep.by its Authorised Signatory, Shailendra Singh – Appellant
Versus
M/s. Ind Barath Thermal Power Ltd., Rep.by its Managing Director, Chennai – Respondent
C.S. No. 362 of 2018 & A. Nos. 7968 & 7969 of 2019
Decided on : 11-08-2021

Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant :Abdul Hameed for M/s AAV Partners, Advocates.
For the Respondent:Adarsh Subramaniam, Arnirudh Krishnan, Advocates.

Headnote:
Commercial Courts Act, 2015 - Section 2(1)(c) (xviii) r/w proviso (1) of Section 7 - Arbitration Act, 1996 - Section 8 - Contracts Act - Section 62 - Civil Procedure Code,1908 - Order VII, Rule 1 - Judgment and decree - Settlement agreement - Defendant took delivery of the goods at Tuticorin - Suit has been filed under Order IV, Rule 1 of O.S. Rules Read with Order VII, Rule 1 of C.P.C., praying to pass a judgment and decree against the defendants by:directing defendant to pay a sum - Suit before Commercial Division of the High Court is filed on premise that the subject matter of the present suit falls under the purview of Commercial Dispute as defined under Section 2(1)(c) (xviii) r/w proviso (1) of Section 7 of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015 - Transactions were submitted in original to Customs Department and the plaintiff is in possession of the photocopies of them. As per the High Seas Sales Agreement - Payments for goods supplied should be made through RTGS or LC on usance basis on the dates mentioned in respective purchase orders - In case of any failure in payment – Held, mandatory pre-requisite to institute suit in Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction of this Court, if part cause of action arisen outside jurisdiction of this Court and the defendant does not carry on business within jurisdiction of Court. Even though written statement not filed - Fact regarding the jurisdiction stated in the plaint found to be false - Court cannot ignore it - Condoning the deliberate suppression of fact will amount to awarding the plaintiff for his wrong - Plaintiff either not to have chosen Chennai as Forum for agitating this case, or should have placed the complete facts in plaint, without any suppression and ought to have obtained prior leave to sue the defendant - Court had quoted and relied only those citations very relevantfor the instant case - Beside the judgments cited, the plain reading of provisions of law regarding jurisdiction is suffice to hold that failure to obtain leave to sue when only part cause of action arisen within the limits of this Court and exclusion of jurisdiction in HSS agreements as well as invoices conferring exclusive jurisdiction to Indore Court and for failure to prove the suit transaction took place at the defendant’s Chennai Office, the plaintiff is to be de-suited - Civil Suit is dismissed

JUDGMENT :

(Prayer: Civil Suit has been filed under Order IV, Rule 1 of O.S. Rules Read with Order VII, Rule 1 of C.P.C., praying to pass a judgment and decree against the defendants by:

(a) directing the defendant to pay a sum of Rs.21,86,88,966/- (Rupees Twenty One Crores Eight Six Lakhs Eighty Eight Thousand and Nine Hundred and Sixty Six Only) as on 31.05.18 on the Principal sum of Rs.16,77,17,100/- (Rupees Sixteen Crores Seventy Seven Lakhs Seventeen Thousand and One Hundred only) together with interest at the rate of 18% per annum from the date of plaint till the day of payment in full to the plaintiff.

(b) the costs.)

(The case has been heard through Video Conferencing)

1. The Suit before the Commercial Division of the High Court is filed on the premise that the subject matter of the present suit falls under the purview of Commercial Dispute as defined under Section 2(1)(c) (xviii) r/w proviso (1) of Section 7 of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015.

2. The gist of the plaint is that, the defendant approached the plaintiff at its office in Chennai and expressed desire to buy steaming, Non Coking Coal in bulk of Indonesian origin. Pursuant to that, the following 15 documents were entered between the parties at Chennai/Tuticorin.

Sl.No.	Parties	Description
01.	Defendant to Plaintiff	Purchase Order dated 01.08.13 for supply of 50000 MT +/- 10% of “Goods” on terms and conditions contained therein.
02.	Plaintiff and Defendant	High Seas Sale Agreement dated 05.08.13 for selling 54875 Mt of “Goods” at the price of Rs.3,393.50/- PMT on terms and conditions contained therein.
03.	Plaintiff to Defendant	Invoice No.TTC/HSS/AUG-13/01 dt.05.08.13, for a total quantity of 54875 MTS of “Goods” for a total price of Rs.18,62,18,312/-.
04.	Defendant to Plaintiff	Purchase Order dated 15.07.14 for supply of 55000 MT +/- 10% of “Goods” on terms and conditions contained therein.
05.	Plaintiff and Defendant	High Seas Sale Agreement dated 03.05.14 for selling 55000 MT of “Goods”at the price of Rs.3,213/- PMT on terms and conditions contained therein.
06.	Plaintiff to Defendant	Invoice No.TTC/HSS/MAY-14/01 dt.23.05.14, for a total quantity of 55000 MTS of “Goods”for a total price of Rs.17,67,15,000/-.
07.	Defendant to Plaintiff	Purchase order dated 15.07.14 for supply of 25000 MT +/-10% of “Goods” on terms and conditions contained therein.
08.	Plaintiff and Defendant	High Seas Sale Agreement dated 20.12.14 for selling 25000 MT of “Goods” at the price of Rs.3,051.60/- PMT on terms and conditions contained therein.
09.	Plaintiff to Defendant	Invoice No.TTC/HSS/DEC-14/02 dt.20.12.14, for a total quantity of 25000 MTS of “Goods” for a total price of Rs.7,62,90,000/-.
10.	Defendant to Plaintiff	Purchase Order dated 28.09.15 for supply of 25000 MT+/ 10% of “Goods” on terms and conditions contained therein.
11.	Plaintiff and Defendant	High Seas Sale Agreement dated 20.10.15 for selling 28820 Mt of “Goods” at the price of Rs.2485/- PMT on terms and conditions contained therein.
12.	Plaintiff to Defendant	Invoice No.TTC/HSS/OCT-15/11 dt.20.10.15, for a total quantity of 28820 MTS of “Goods” for a total price of Rs.7,16,17,700/-.
13.	Defendant to Plaintiff	Purchase Order dated 27.06.15 for supply of 55000 MT +/- 10% of “Goods” on terms and conditions contained therein.
14.	Plaintiff and Defendant	High Seas Sale Agreement dated 16.07.15 for selling 30000 MT of “Goods” at the price of Rs.2700/- PMT on terms and conditions contained therein.
15.	Plaintiff to Defendant	Invoice No.TTC/HSS/JUL-15/01 dt.16.07.15, for a total quantity of 30000 MTS of “Goods”for a total price of Rs.8,10,00,000/-.
	TOTAL	1,93,695 MTS

3. As per the trade practise, all the doc

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

2021 Supreme(Mad) 1317

Cases Referred (3)