2012 (1) TMI 392 - HC - Indian Laws

Summary

Issues involved:
Challenge to ex-parte decree dated 05.02.2002

Plaintiff's Averments:
- Defendant No. 1 represented supply of mixed waste from USA
- Plaintiff placed order for 100 MT of mixed waste
- Defendant No. 1 assured good quality but goods were defective
- Plaintiff incurred expenses in transporting and clearing goods

Legal Interpretation - Section 230 of The Indian Contract Act, 1872:
- An agent cannot personally enforce contracts u/s 230
- Exceptions include cases where the principal cannot be sued
- Supreme Court interpretation in AIR 1962 SC 538 sets clear guidelines

Defendant No. 1's Role:
- Defendant No. 1 acted as agent of M/s.Espee Trading Corporation
- Principal disclosed in documents and not liable for breach
- Plaintiff did not sue M/s.Espee Trading Corporation

Defendant No. 2's Liability:
- No averment to lift corporate veil of defendant No. 1 to reach defendant No. 2
- Suit fails against defendant No. 1, hence no liability for defendant No. 2

Judgment and Conclusion:
- Appeal allowed, decree set aside, suit dismissed
- Principle of law in Section 230 may need legislative review
- Costs to be borne by respective parties
- Amount deposited by appellants to be returned with interest