ANITA AGGARWAL Vs. KHARANAND AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY way of present petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has assailed an order dated 19th December 2009 of learned Additional District Judge whereby the trial court decided the preliminary issue regarding limitation and held that the suit filed by the respondents herein was not barred by limitation.

(2.) BRIEF facts relevant for the purpose of deciding this petition are that the petitioner was appointed as an agent by the respondents No. 2 and 3 i.e. Chief Post Master and National Saving Organization respectively. The petitioner approached different customers for sale of Kisan Vikas Patras (KVPs) on behalf of respondent No. 2 and 3. In the process, the petitioner received consideration for issuance of KVPs. She issued receipts on behalf of respondent No. 2, regarding receiving consideration. As per the terms and conditions of agency, the petitioner was supposed to deposit the amount received from different customers with respondent No. 2. The amount being received by her against receipt in fact was received on behalf of respondent No. 2 herein, who was the principal and receipts were also being issued by her on behalf of respondent No. 2.

(3.) IN the written statement, the petitioner took a stand that the suit was barred by limitation. The learned ADJ framed a preliminary issue about limitation and observed that the limitation has to be counted from the date of receipt of letter from the Chief Post Master and not from the date of filing of police complaint and upheld that the suit was within the period of limitation.