https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=295861 An agent signing a bill of lading on behalf of a disclosed foreign principal is not personally liable for the alleged loss unless a contract to the contrary is shown, and no such privity or contrary agreement was established. The bill of lading also contained a jurisdiction clause requiring disputes to be brought only in the contractually chosen forum, and the plaintiff was bound by that term after accepting the bill of lading as the contract. On that basis, the Chennai suit was not maintainable. The stated ratio is that disclosed agency defeats personal liability absent contrary contract, and agreed forum selection clauses govern the place of suit. en-us Tue, 23 Aug 2016 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 23 Jun 2021 10:09:33 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=295861 An agent signing a bill of lading on behalf of a disclosed foreign principal is not personally liable for the alleged loss unless a contract to the contrary is shown, and no such privity or contrary agreement was established. The bill of lading also contained a jurisdiction clause requiring disputes to be brought only in the contractually chosen forum, and the plaintiff was bound by that term after accepting the bill of lading as the contract. On that basis, the Chennai suit was not maintainable. The stated ratio is that disclosed agency defeats personal liability absent contrary contract, and agreed forum selection clauses govern the place of suit. Case-Laws Indian Laws Tue, 23 Aug 2016 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=295861