GURUPRASAD Vs. K PADMAVATHI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS Revision Petition under Section 18 of the Karnataka Small causes Courts' Act arises from the Judgment and decree dated 8. 1. 1996 delivered by the XV Addl. Small Causes Judge at Bangalore in number S. C. 7496/93 dismissing the plaintiff's suit for recovery of the sum of Rs. 15. 145/ -.

(2.) THE facts of the case in the nut shell are that the plaintiff -company, as per plaint allegations is carrying on the financing and leasing business and, according to plaintiff, defendant No. 1 approached the plaintiffs-revision petitioners for purchase of one dynora Colour Television and the same being leased out to her on monthly rental basis. The plaintiffs - revision petitioner's case is that defendant Nos. 2 and 3 were the guarantors. According to the plaintiff, petitioner plaintiff purchased one Dynora T. V. from Balaji Electronics for Rs. 11,000/-on 1. 4. 1989 and delivered the same to 1st defendant and the 1st defendant executed the lease agreement on April 3rd, 1989 according plaintiffs' case-agreeing to pay Rs. 420/- per month in 36 months from 2nd May, 1989. According to plaintiffs', defendant No. 3, that is, respondent No. 3 was a drawing officer and Head Master of the staff members and he undertook to pay rental of Rs. 420/- every month after having deducted the same from the salary of the plaintiff. Plaintiff further alleged that he had purchased 6 more T. Vs from balaji Electronics and leased the same to other members of the staff of 3rd defendant. Plaintiff alleged that 3rd defendant used to pay the amount in lumpsum towards monthly rental of Rs. 420/- due by 1st defendant and its other staff members. He further averred that defendant No. 3 had paid only Rs. 4,320/- towards the rent due from defendant No. 1 and thereafter did not pay anything. The balance amount, according to plaintiff, due against defendants was rs. 10,800/- towards the hire charges. The plaintiff's case is that he had given notice, but notice was of no effect and, so plaintiff had to file the suit for recovery of the sum of Rs. 10,800/- as hire charges with penal interest amounting to Rs. 4,095/- and notice charges of rs. 250a, in all Rs. 15,1457 -.

(3.) ON notice being served, the defendants put in appearance and filed their written statements denying the plaintiff's claim. They denied that the 1st defendant approached the plaintiff's company for purchase of Dyanora Colour T. V. for least out or selling the same to defendants No. 1 on monthly rental basis. Defendant No. 1 denied that she ever approached the plaintiff. It was also denied that defendants 2 and 3 were guarantors. The defendant No. 1 had denied that Dyanora T. V. was purchased by the plaintiff and it was delivered by the plaintiff to the 1st defendant. The defendant No. 1 denied the execution of lease deed dated 3. 4. 89 and asserted that when T. V. was not delivered, there was no question of paying monthly instalments. The defendant No. 1 denied the liability for the sums claimed for the plaintiff.