Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
7. The suit was contested by both sets of defendants on various grounds. Defendants
first set inter alia pleaded that there was no settlement of accounts between them and
the plaintiff as alleged by the latter; that the accounts were liable to be reopened as
they were tainted with fraud, obvious mistakes etc., and that on a true and correct
accounting a large sum of money would be found due to them; that though the
plaintiff and Seth Sugan Chand (who owned Indra Spinning and Weaving Mills and
had a covetous eye on John Mills) had obtained various documents, agreements,
vouchers, receipts etc. at various times from them, the same were of no legal value
as they were secured by the former by practising undue influence, fraud, coercion
and misrepresentation. It was further pleaded by the defendants that the plaintiff had
illegally and contrary to the agreement dated July 6, 1948 debited them with huge
amounts which were not really due to them. It was further pleaded by the said
defendants that the cotton supplied to them by the aforesaid financiers was of
inferior quality and the amounts charged by them in respect thereof were exorbitant
and far in excess of the prevailing market rates. The said defendants further pleaded
that though under the terms of the agreement dated February 9, 1948 no commission
on sales and purchases had been agreed to be paid by them to the financiers still
they had been debited with huge amounts on that account and likewise though