* 1 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION APPEAL NO.43 OF 2006 IN SUMMONS FOR JUDGMENT NO. 346 OF 2006 IN SUMMARY SUIT NO. 1094 OF 2005 Khushal Hansraj Gala .....Appellant/Orig.Defnd V/s. Jayesh Jayantilal & Co. .....Respondents/Orig.Plffs --------- Mr.P.V.Bhagat i/by.Vasant & Co.,adv.for appellant. Mr.Prakash Gunwani with Mr.Ashraf A. Diamondwala i/by.RMG Law Associates,adv.for respondents. CORAM :- V.C.DAGA & SMT.R.P.SONDURBALDOTA,,JJ. DATED : 18TH AUGUST, 2009 P.C. 1. Heard counsels for both sides. 2. The appellant, original defendant challenges the order of making the Summons for Judgment absolute and decreeing the suit filed for recovery of balance purchase price for the goods sold and delivered to him. 3. There is no dispute as regards the transaction of sale, delivery * 2 * of goods and the balance of the purchase price due and payable therefor. The only contention raised before us by the applicant is that the repsondent is not entitled to maintain the suit as the goods were sold and delivered not by the respondent but by one M/s. Kirti Dal Mills Ltd. It is the respondents case that the goods had been supplied to the appellant through M/s.Kirti Dall Mills Ltd as commission agent. The appellant as by his letter dated 31st January, 2002 has confirmed that the balance amount is due and payable to the respondents. The letter also states that the respondent was authorised to receive the payment on behalf of M/s.Kirti Dall Mills Ltd. In the circumstances, we are of the opinion that the view taken by the learned Single Judge is correct and reasonable view. The same does not warrant interference. Hence, the appeal is dismissed. (SMT.R.P.SONDURBALDOTA, J) (V.C.DAGA,J.)