LexSUCHETAN EXPORTS P. LTD. versus GUPTA COAL INDIA LIMITED AND ORS.
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
[2011) 9 S.C.R. 689 . ). SUCH ETAN EXPORTS P. LTD. A v. GUPTA COAL INDIA LIMITED AND ORS. /" ( (Special Leave Petition (C) No. 201 OQ of 2011) / AUGUST 02, 2011 8 .,. [ALTAMAS KABIR, CYRIAC JOSEPH AND SURINDER SINGH NIJJAR, JJ.] Contract - High Seas Sale Agreement - Respondent no. 1/sel/er and Petitioner/purchaser entered into an c Agreement for sale and purchase of 16, 943 metric tonnes of South African Coal - Respondent no. 1 delivered the entire consignment of 16,943 metric tones through Respondent no.3 ~ to Respondent no.2 (the stevedore agent) for transmission to Petitioner- Respondent No.2 handed over 9,542.920 metric D .. tonnes to the Petitioner - Balance quantity of coal amounting to 7400.082 metric tones remained with Respondent No.2 - Respondent no. 1 raised High Seas Sa/es Invoice - Dispute between Respondent No. 1 and Petitioner - Respondent No. 1 filed Civil Suit, inter alia, for a declaration that the Petitioner E had committed breach of contract and also claimed return of the balance quantity of coal, amounting to 7400.082 metric tonnes, lying with Respondent No.2 and for a decree against the Petitioner towards the balance payment of the 9,542.920 /'· metric tonnes of coal delivered to it by Respondent No. 2 - F Respondent No. 1 also claimed permanent injunction to restrain Respondent Nos.2 and 3 from handing over the balance amount of coal measuring 7400.082 metric tonnes tying with Respondent No. 2, either to the Petitioner or to any other person - Respondent No. 1 also prayed for an interim G order in the same terms and also sought a direction in the ~:; form of a mandatory injunction to Responde.nt No. 2 to hand over the balance coal to Respondent No. 1 - On 9-2-2011, trial court passed an ex-parte order of injunction restraining 689 H 690 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2011J 9 S.C.R. A Respondent Nos.2 and 3 from handing over the custody ol the balance coal weighing 7400.082 metric tonnes to any person and particularly to the Petitioner - Subsequently, by its order dated 16-4-2011, the trial court also allowed the application of Respondent No. 1 for temporary injunction and B confirmed the ad-interim injunction granted earlier on 9-2- 2011 - The trial court also passed an order of injunction in mandatory form directing Respondent No.2 to hand over the balance coal of 7400.082 metric tonnes in its possession to Respondent No. 1 on payment of rent, if any, due from the said c Respondent - High Court modified the order of the trial court passed on 16-4-2011 by directing the Petitioner to deposit an amount of Rs.6, 19,58, 1231- in the Trial Court, within a period of six weeks and further directing that if such amount was deposited within a stipulated period by the Petitioner, the 0 application for grant of temporary injunction filed by Respondent no. 1 shall stand dismissed - Held: Having entered into an agreement to purchase the coal in question it was upto the Petitioner to fulfill its obligation towards the payment of the price of the coal and to lift the same from the E Stevedore/Respondent No. 2, having particular regard to the fact that the Agreement was a High Seas Sa/es Agreement which entails clearance of the goods from the vessel and its entrustment with the Stevedore which involved heavy costs per diem - Prima facie, the terms of the High Seas Sa/es Agreement appear to indicate that till the entire sale price was F paid by the Petitioner to Respondent No.1, Respondent No.1 would retain its lien over the coal in question and title would pass to the Petitioner only on payment of the full price of the goods - However, having regard to the fact that an opportunity had been given to the Petitioner to lift the said balance G quantity of coal on deposit of Rs. 6, 19, 58, 1231- within the stipulated period of six weeks, the instant SLP is disposed of, by modifying the order of the High Court to the extent that in the event the Petitioner deposits the amount directed to be deposited by the High Court, after deduction of the price of H the coal already lifted by Respondent No. 1 within a period of .. • ... SUCHETAN EXPORTS P. LTD. v. GUPTA COAL 691 INDIA LIMITED AND ORS . .. ) Four weeks, the Petitioner will be entitled to lift the remaining A quantity of coal lying in the custody of Respondent No.2 - In default of such deposit, the order of the High Court, subject to the above modification, will continue in f
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.