MEHKAR SINGH Vs. RAJINDER KUMAR SHARMA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE challenge by means of this Regular First Appeal filed under Section 96 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC) is to the impugned judgment of the Trial Court dated 30.1.2004 dismissing the suit of the appellant/plaintiff for recovery of salary and damages of Rs.3,80,000/ - on account of having been caused injuries during the course of employment because of attack by persons who had disputes with the respondent/defendant.

(2.) THE facts of the case are that the appellant/plaintiff claimed that he was employed with the respondent/defendant with effect from March, 1998 for ploughing his field including leveling of the earth as the same land was earlier used for a brick kiln. It was further pleaded in the plaint that the respondent/defendant paid salary of Rs.10,000/ - per month only upto January, 1999 and thereafter did not pay the salary. It was further pleaded that on 16.5.1999, the appellant/plaintiff was beaten by some persons because of which he had to be hospitalized. The respondent/defendant is stated to have got signed some blank papers from him under the pretext of using the same for proper investigation of the case. The subject suit came to be filed alleging non -payment of salary and for recovery of medical expenses incurred in the treatment. It transpired that the injuries were caused to the appellant/plaintiff by one Sh.Badle Ram who was claiming that the subject agricultural land, for which the appellant/plaintiff was appointed as an employee, did not belong to the respondent/defendant but belonged to said Badle Ram. A sum of Rs.2,30,000/ - was claimed towards salary, Rs.50,000/ -

(3.) THE respondent/defendant contested the suit and denied that the appellant/plaintiff was employed at a salary of Rs.10,000/ - per month. It was pleaded that the appellant/plaintiff was employed by the respondent/defendant as a daily wager for about 40 to 45 days for harvesting of crops alongwith other daily wage labourers. It was denied that the appellant/plaintiff was appointed on a salary of Rs.10,000/ - per month. It was further alleged that the subject suit was a malafide suit inasmuch as it was filed in collusion with said Sh.Badle Ram and his sons and the appellant/plaintiff had turned hostile in the criminal case. It was further stated in the written statement that the subject land belonged to the respondent/defendant and Sh.Badle Ram after being unsuccessful in obtaining an interim injunction in a bid to stop the crop harvesting on the subject agricultural land, had attacked the daily wage labourers of the respondent/defendant including the appellant/plaintiff. This incident took place on 16.5.1999. It is also pleaded that the respondent/defendant paid for medical expenses/treatment and also took back the appellant/plaintiff to his residence at Meerut after his discharge from the hospital. It was pleaded that the suit was malafide because the appellant/plaintiff was won over by Sh. Badle Ram and appellant/plaintiff had changed his statement in the criminal case and had become a hostile witness.