JAIN TRADERS, PARTNER Vs. SHAILESH SINGHANIYA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is an appeal directed against the judgment and decree dated 17-8-1999 passed by VII Additional District Judge, Raipur, in Civil Suit No. 61-B/95, whereby decreeing the suit for recovery of Rs. 17,252/- along with interest in favour of plaintiff/respondent.

(2.) FACTS in brief as unfolded before the Lower Court are that the plaintiff/respondent filed a suit against the defendant/appellant for recovery of Rs. 17,252/- averring that he is consigning and forwarding agent of Birla Tyres with whom defendant/appellant who is dealer of Birla Tyres purchased tyres vide Invoice Nos. 575,581 and 582 total costing Rs. 1,82,550/-. Consignment was sent to him on 8-9-1993 and the goods were received by defendant/appellant on 10-9-1993. According to sale agreement defendant/appellant was required to make payment within sixty days, but he did not pay the same within stipulated period, therefore, the security deposit of Rs. 50,000/-, credit note in his favour for Rs. 29,359/- and Rs. 28,939/- towards replacement of tyres were adjusted against the balance amount and after adjustment for remaining amount, Claim notice was served on him, but was not acted upon by the appellant/defendant.

(3.) BOTH the parties in support of their case adduced oral and documentary evidence. Learned Lower Court after appreciation of evidence held that plaintiff/respondent in the capacity of agent of Birla Tyres was doing his business of selling tyres in the name of M/s. Vijay Traders Raipur, an amount of Rs. 74,252/- being cost of tyres was due against defendant/appellant for payment to plaintiff/respondent. Suit is time barred it could not be proved.