The defendant had a right of lien over the goods for unpaid freight charges, justifying the withholding of delivery and limiting the plaintiff's recovery to the balance amount after deductions.

JUDGMENT :

G.RADHA RANI, J.

This appeal is filed by the appellant-defendant aggrieved by the judgment and decree dated 16.03.2018 in O.S No.638 of 2016 on the file of the IV Senior Civil Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad.

2. The respondent is the plaintiff.

3. For the sake of convenience, the parties are hereinafter referred as arrayed before the trial court.

4. The plaintiff filed the suit for recovery of money of Rs.14,00,000/- with interest at 12% per annum from the date of decree till realization with costs. The plaintiff contended that it was a private limited company doing the business of marketing and selling of seeds. It was having agents all over India for marketing the products and one of its marketing agent, by name, M/s. Om Sai Agro Marketing was located at Lucknow. During the course of its business, the plaintiff engaged the services of the defendant for transportation of products by its agents to Hyderabad and thus, four trucks load of agricultural seeds of maize were transported to Hyderabad on 16.07.2014, 17.07.2014, 23.07.2014 and 25.07.2014. The freight charges amounting to Rs.2,23,083/- was payable at the dispatch point. The said goods were delivered to the address of the plaintiff at Hyderabad in August, 2014. The defendant did not come forward to receive the freight charges from the plaintiff. In the meanwhile, the plaintiff also engaged the services of the defendant for transportation of the 5^th truck of maize seeds and the same was dispatched through consignment No.F410247 dated 29.09.2014. Even after waiting till December, 2014, the said stocks were not delivered by the defendant to the plaintiff. After verification and confirmation with the consignor, the plaintiff corresponded with the defendant about non-delivery of 5^th consignment which was of a value of Rs.20,00,000/-. The said stocks were perishable in nature as the seeds had to be protected and kept in moderate temperature in cold storage, otherwise they would be damaged and not useful. Through the correspondence, the plaintiff realized that the defendant had illegally detained and withheld the stocks sent through them in their godown and demanded the plaintiff for payment of freight charges and also issued notices to the plaintiff on 04.02.2015 acknowledging the receipt of the consignment and also expressed its intention to declare the consignment as unclaimed under Section 15 (1) of the Carriage by Road Act , 2007 and to sell the consignment if the amounts were not paid within seven days and that he would auction the goods worth Rs.20,00,000/- for recovery of Rs.2,79,879/-. The plaintiff had given reply notice through their counsel on 11.02.2015 by narrating the true facts and also brought to the notice of the defendant that the goods had to be safeguarded and protected to avoid germination as the entire material would lose its value and that the defendant could not withhold the stocks without delivering the consignment to the plaintiff causing enormous loss to the plaintiff and expressed through the legal notice that the plaintiff was ready to pay the freight charges and requested to deliver the truck load of maize seeds immediately to avoid further complications and warned the defendant that if the material was damaged, it would be worthless and the damages had to be paid by the defendant. The defendant communicated to the plaintiff by letter dated 25.03.2015 that auction would be held on 10.04.2015 and that the bids would be called before 06.04.2015 and invited the plaintiff for participation in the same. The plaintiff further submitted that the defendant filed Company Petition No.114 of 2016 under Section 433(e)(f) and 439(c) of the Companies Act for winding up of the plaintiff company. The plaintiff contended that the defendant could not retain the stocks consigned through it and could not put them to auction and realize the amounts and again claim for the freight charges instead of returning the remaining balance received by putting to auctio