AIR 2009 (NOC) 384 (BOM.) = 2008 (6) AIR BOM R 345 ::2008 (6) AIR Bom R 345 ::2009 A I H C 654

Bombay High Court

Hon'ble Judge(s): A. M. Khanwilkar , J

(A) Civil Procedure Code (5 of 1908) S. 20 — Territorial jurisdiction — Breach of contract — Suit for damages — Contract was signed by the plaintiff in Mumbai — Goods were delivered in Mumbai — Payment was to be made in Mumbai — Letters from defendants accepting said contract were also received by the plaintiffs in Mumbai — Making of contract, its performance and its breach had occurred within jurisdiction of Court at Bombay — Entire cause of action occurred in Mumbai — Court at Mumbai would have jurisdiction to try the suit (Para 8)

(B) Contract Act (9 of 1872) S. 73 — Breach of contract — Suit for damages — Defendants by their letter requested plaintiff, a Government undertaking, to import cotton bales on their behalf — Plaintiff accordingly arranged for import of goods — After clearance of the goods from port trust, plaintiff called upon defendants to arrange for payment and take delivery thereof — As defendants failed to do so, plaintiff gave legal notice placing on record that plaintiffs were forced to clear the goods and stored them in godown on behalf of defendants to avoid mounting demurrage and other charges — Case of defendants that breach of contract was in fact committed by plaintiffs as, goods offered to them by plaintiffs were of inferior quality and were offered beyond stipulated period — No evidence produced by defendants to show that goods were of inferior quality — In their communication they expressed their inability to take delivery of goods on account of financial difficulty and not because of delayed delivery — Defendants committed breach of contract — Plaintiff entitled to damages (Para 24,28) .....