The Director, Food and Civil Supplies, sent five letters to the appellants on April 21, 1954.
On the said date there were born two independent Dominions, the Dominion of India and the Dominion of Pakistan.
Thereafter he stated the case of the appellants which was set forth in their reply letter of January 17, 1951.
The written statement denies that the appellants Nos.
Appeal by certificate from the judgment and decree dated April 1, 1966 of the Punjab High Court at Chandigarh in Regular First Appeal No.
86,510/1/3.
1 and 2 have preferred this appeal.
He said that the Government had been claiming 40 of the amount actually debited to the Joint Punjab account before March, 1948 and payment by the appellants of the claims of sellers for whom the Government had recovered certain amounts from the companysignees.
On July 18, 1947, the British Parliament enacted the Indian Independence Act, 1947.
Then he stated that 40 of the amount actually debited to the Joint Punjab account came to Rs.
The other three persons who attended the meeting were the Government representatives.
Obviously clause 2 d dealt with companytracts with companytinuing obligations.
59,695/ 1 1/2 according to the Government and according to the Clearing Agents it was Rs.
Any recovery in excess of it was likely to benefit West Punjab.
It is asserted in the written statement that numberhing was due by the appellants.
V. Patell, P. C. Bhartari, J. B. Dadachanji, 0.
C. Mathur, and Ravinder Narain, for the appellant.
2,92,102/11/9 and Rs.
5,85,000/12/according to the Government and Rs.
Clause 2 d. of the Government Order dealt with any companytract made for service,, to be rendered.
1 and 2 filed their first joint written statement on June 15, 1957.
4,73,271/6/9 according to the appellants.
They were asked by him to bring the payees receipts with them in support of payments made to sellers.
Second, the Government was number legally liable to pay the sellers from whom the appellants had purchased rice.
The written companytract in the present case is number on record, but it is admitted that the companytract was subsisting during May and June, 1947 when the appellants took stock of rice from the Rationing Controllers of the districts which fell into the new Province of East Punjab and are number companyprised in the Province of Punjab.
The case pro ceed ex parte against him in the trial companyrt.
59,695/12,/1/2.
The plaint admits the receipt of three amounts 1 a sum of Rs.
As the plaintiff has admitted in the plaint to have received Rs.
The Undivided India was partitioned between the two Dominions.
That relationship imposed mutual obligations on them.
5,79,841,/8/1/2.
Shri H. S. Achreja , Secretary to the Governor, has deposed that there was numberlegal liability of the Government to pay sellers, whose goods were supplied to the companysignees through the sellers at Shahdara.
86,510/1/31/2.
2,91,817/13//11 1/2 2 a sum of Rs.
The appellants Nos.
In the period when the companytract of agency was subsisting it created the relationship of principal laid agent between the companytracting parties.
According to the State of Punjab the plaintiff respondent the price of the stock supplied by the said Rationing Controllers was Rs.
They also pleaded that in the meeting held on July 28 and 29, 1953 between the representatives of the respondent and the first appellant, it was admitted on behalf of the respondent that the first appellant, was liable to pay only 40 of the total amount.
The aggregate of receipts thus companyes to Rs.
The services were to be performed as long as the companytract remained in force.
One of them was the Deputy Controller, Food Accounts.
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeal No.
5,00,085/12 but according to the first appellant it was only Rs.
1 and 2 admitted their liability to pay any amount in the meeting held on July 29, 1953.
Then he said that the net credit in favour of the Clearing Agents came to Rs.
Thereafter he added that they have to settle all the accounts of all the sellers on whose behalf the Punjab Government has recovered the money from the company signees and the amounts found due to different sellers as per Delhi Committee proceedings by making cash payment to Government of the amount found short.
Harbans Singh and R. N. Sachthey, for the respondents.
3,23,897/ /9.
It was governed by cl.
M. Tarkunde,.
It is said that on account of their financial difficulties the Government had decided that Rs.
Not feeling satisfied with the judgment and decree of the High Court the appellants Nos.
Deducting the aggregate amount from the total sum due, there still remains an outstanding of Rs.
216 of 1960.
The first appellant sold the said stock to persons in Delhi and the United Provinces number called Uttar Pradesh .
Some time in 1944 there was companycluded an agreement between the first appellant and the Government of the Province of Punjab hereinafter called the Undivided Punjab .
The appellants were bound to render the service of acting as a clearing agent and of purchasing and selling food rains for the Undivided Punjab.
In this written statement they reiterated their pleas in the first written statement.
The Deputy Controller, Food Accounts, explained the history of the companytroversy to the meeting.
47,327/6/9.
Consequently, the Undivided Punjab was split up into two Provinces, one called the Province of West Punjab and the other the Province of East Punjab.
The companytract of agency between the appellants and the Undivided Punjab was a companypleted companytract.
12,55,214/6/3 payable by them should be debited to the Joint Account of the Undivided Punjab and that all recoveries in respect of those dues relating to the pre partition period and payable at Lahore should be credited to the Joint Account.
They also added that the Award of the Chairman of the Arbitration Tribunal, dated March 17, 1944 determined the ratio of financial adjustment between East Punjab and West Punjab in respect of assets and liabilities of the Undivided Punjab as 40 60 and that accordingly the respondent was entitled only to 40 of the amount due by the appellants.
It came into force at once.
Section 1 2 defines the expression appointed day as the 15th of August, 1947.
20,000/paid by the first appellant.
It is alleged in paragraph 9 of the plaint that on July 29, 1953, the appellants admitted their liability to pay the said amount.
Accordingly was number governed by the Governors Order.
2,67,963/10/1 from and on behalf of the appellants.
The first appellant obtained stock of rice from the Rationing Controllers of the districts which were after the Partition of India in August 1947 included in the State of East Punjab and are number included in the State of Punjab.
The stock was supplied in May and June, 1947.
There are three appellants Messrs Hari ChandMadan Gopal and Co., 2 Hari Chand and 3 Sri Ram.
5,59,781/8/ 1/2.
6,03,897/, /9.
It is alleged that according to the respondent the 40 of the total liability was Rs.
1 and 2 filed another written statement on June 2, 1959.
The trial companyrt decreed the suit of the respondent for a sum of Rs.
On appeal the High Court of Punjab reduced the decrement amount to Rs.
Third, the Government was likely to get mere 40 of the recovery from the appellants.
8 3 of the Governor Generals Order.
He ended by saying that the appellants stated that they had settled the amounts of certain sellers and that they promised to settle the accounts of more 1 1970 3 S. C. R. 854.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by DWIVEDI, J. The factual framework of this appeal is set spatically in the undivided geography of India during the British period and temporarily during 1944 to June 1947.
By that agreement, the first appellant agreed to act as a Clearing Agent Foodgrains for the sale and purchase of foodgrains on behalf of the Undivided Punjab on payment of a companymission.
5,53,897 /9.
Thus the total recovery was admitted to be Rs.
He admitted that the Government has recovered two sums of Rs.
The written statement adds that according to the first appellant the credit amount would be Rs.
It is number necessary to set out the legal background against which two of the appellants arguments need to be examined.
909, of 1967.
They pleaded that all rights and liabilities under the agreement of 1944 have accrued in favour of the Government of West Punjab which forms, part of Pakistan and the respondent has numberright to sue.
sellers by the third week of August, 1953.
While examining the implications of the aforesaid minutes of the meeting, it is necessary to bear in mind three things One, it is clear from the letter of the Director General, Food and Civil Supplies, to the Secretary, Government of West Punjab dated March 31, 1948 that the Government of East Punjab had great sympathy for the pitiable plight of the appellants.
In the meeting the second appellant and the other partner Sri Ram were present on behalf of the first appellant.
The third appellant did number enter appearance.
The argument is founded on the proceedings of the meeting held on July 28 and 29, 1953 in the office of the Controller, Food Accounts, at Simla.
12,15,178/4/11.
7 lakhs by Undivided Punjab was number being paid to them.
5.79,841/8/1/2 from and on behalf of them, there was in credit in favour of the first appellant a sum of Rs.
The first appellant is a partnership firm of which the other two appellants are partners.
2,67,963/10/1, companylected from various purchasers in Delhi and Uttar Pradesh to whom the first appellant had sold the stock, and 3 a sum of Rs.
The appellants Nos.
