9911796707
TMI Blog1989 (8) TMI 377X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of carpets under the name and style of M/s. Jaswal Carpet Co. since a number of years. M/s. Mayur Carpets (P) Ltd.. respondent No. 2 has a branch office at Bhadohi. Both the parties had entered into a written agreement on 9th April, 1987 by which the petitioner was to supply unwashed and un-finished carpets to the Branch office of respondent No. 2 at Bhadohi. Accordingly the petitioner continued to supply such carpets to respondent No. 2 from time to time and also had been rendering proper accounts. However, disputes arose between the parties which led to the issuance of two notices dated 2nd February, 1988 and 2nd March, 1988 through Shri Surendra Nath Varma, Advocate, Gianpur, Varanasi on behalf of respondent No. 2. Thereafter some terms ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nd the place of business of the second party i.e. the petitioner is also shown as Bhadohi. It refers to an earlier agreement of September. 1986 on certain terms and conditions. One of the relevant terms is term No. 1, according to which the woollen handmade carpets were to be supplied by the petitioner to respondent No. 2 at its Bhadohi office. When the disputes arose between the parties. they entered into a second agreement dated 4-2-1988, a copy of that agreement is at page 24 of the file. In its heading, it clearly mentions that this agreement was reached at Bhadohi between the parties. The attesting witness Murari Lal also belonged to Bhadohi. Various invoices which are Annexures 'E' from page 27 to 45 issued by the petitioner s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... agreement between the parties was entered into at Bhadohi, the delivery of the woollen carpets was to be given by the petitioner to respondent No. 2 at Bhadohi, When the disputes arose between the parties then they were resolved and settled into the shape of another agreement dated 4-2-88 between the parties at Bhadohi where respondent No. 2 has its branch office. Simply because respondent No. 2 has its head office at New Delhi, in my opinion, this circumstance in itself will not furnish any ground to respondent No. 2 to take recourse to criminal proceedings against the petitioner at New Delhi because the agreement between the parties was entered into at Bhadohi. There is no denial about this fact that respondent No. 2 has no branch office ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... i. It was precisely for this reason that respondent No. 2 filed a civil suit against the petitioner in the Court of Civil Judge, Gianpur, Varanasi who had the territorial jurisdiction against the petitioner. The fact that the agreement was entered into at Bhadohi is not at all stated in the complaint filed by respondent No. 2 at New Delhi. Similarly when Shri Tejinder Singh who is one of the Directors of respondent No. 2 company appeared as a witness in support of the complaint, did not state as to at which place the agreement was entered into between the parties. He examined two witnesses in support of his claim. One is Kanhiya Lal who as an Accountant of respondent No. 2 in its office at Delhi. He deposed that be used to maintain account ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
