UNITED DISTRIBUTORS (PVT.) LTD. Versus INTERNATIONAL PRESTIGE SRL
This is a suit for injunction and recovery of compensation amounting to Rs.70,00,000.
2. Case of the plaintiff is that it is a company carrying on business of the sale and distribution of various goods including Refrigerators. Indesit Refrigerators are manufactured by a company known as Indesit S.P.A. which had entered into an arrangement with defendant No.1 in terms whereof the said defendant markets and sells Indesit Refrigerator in various countries including Pakistan. The defendant No.1 had appointed the plaintiff as' distributor by means of a contract dated 14‑1‑1987. The plaintiff acting in good faith and in the bona fide belief that defendant No.1 would only supply Refrigerators of standard quality and free from defects which would meet recognized marketing standard, placed order for 5,000 Refrigerators and Free Lers at a total price of US $ 1,809,742.40. The payment for the said Refrigerators was to be made under five L.Cs. Four L.Cs. were encashed before filing of the suit and the 5th has been encashed during the pendency of this suit. On arrival of the Refrigerators the plaintiff started marketing and selling the same. However, it was discovered that a large number of complaints started flowing regarding the quality of the units sold. In particular in relation to model No. 2251 an exceptionally large number of complaints were received. The plaintiff had to repair the Refrigerators and Freezers which it had sold while 2,074 Refrigerators of Model 2251, 546 units of Model 2751 and 150 units model are completely unsalable and are lying with the plaintiff. Hence the Plaintiff has prayed for injunction restraining the encashment of the 5th L.C. and for recovery of Rs.7 million with interest at 14$ per annum as compensation for the loss thus occasioned to it.
3. The plaintiff has withdrawn his suit against defendant No‑2 Citibank, State Life Building, I.I. Chundrigar Road, Karachi after encashment of 5th L.C. and has also given up the prayer of injunction as the same has become infructuous. Defendant No.1 has chosen to remain absent in spite of service through D.H.L. Orean Services. Hence the suit has proceeded ex parte against defendant No.1 The plaint is verified on oath. It is accompanied by photo copies of Distribution Contract Annexure "A", details of L.Cs. Annexure "B". Telex Annexure "C" Minutes of Meeting held between United Distributors and International Prestige SRL Annexure "D/I", letter of the plaintiff to defendant No.1 International Prestige SRL Annexure "D.II", Telex of defendant No.1 Annexure "E", Telex of plaintiff to the defendant No.1 Annexure "G", Telex of the defendant No.1 in reply of plaintiffs Telex Annexure "H", Telex of plaintiff to defendant No.1 Annexure "I". The originals of all these documents are with plaintiff's counsel. The plaintiff has also filed an affidavit‑in‑evidence wherein he has given the details of the losses suffered by it. The most pertinent pare in this connection is pare 15 which is reproduced as under:‑
"Para 15. That without prejudice to its claim for an injunction the plaintiff submits that it is also entitled to recover compensation from the defendant for the actual and potential losses suffered by it. The details of actual and potential losses suffered by the plaintiff are given as under:
(1) Compensation US $ 35 for each unit of 2251 Model held in stock by plaintiff. Total stock 2,074 units. Rs.13,79,210.00
(2) Expenditure incurred in refilling of gas due to leakage or under charging 256
Refrigerators at the rate of
Rs.300 per unit. Rs.76,800.00
(3) Cost of repairing damages to body interior and exterior unhinged doors 289 units at , the rate of Rs.300 per unit. , Rs.86,700.00
(4) Cost of changing replacing compressors 103 units at the rate of Rs.1,800 per unit. Rs.1,85,400.00
(5) Expenditure on refilling of gas due to leakage 320 units at the rate of Rs.300 per unit. Rs.96,000.00
(6) Cost of repairs of damages due to manufacturing defects i.e. some refrigerators were dented and doors were not hinged 312 units at the rate of Rs.300 per unit. Rs.93,000.00
(7) Replacement of compressors were found defective 217 units 1800 23 3,90,600 units
@ 2000 46,00 Rs.4,36,600.00
It would appear that the plaintiff has claimed to have sustained, losses amounting to Rs.96,00,181 whereas in his plainti he has prayed for recovery of Rs.7 million only. Mr. Afsar Abid who appeared for the plaintiff stated that the plaintiff was agreeable to receive the compensation of Rs.70,00,000 in full and final satisfaction on its claim against the defendant No.1 The above evidence of the plaintiff has gone unchallenged and unrebutted. The compensation claimed by the plaintiff appears to be reasonable. I, therefore, decree the plaintiff's suit against defendant No.1 for a sum of Rs.70,00,000. I allow interest at the rate of 10$ per annum from the date of the filing of this suit till the recovery of the decretal amount. The cost of the suit shall be borne by defendant No.1
M.Y.H./U‑42/K Suit partly decreed.