(1.) This Second Appeal is filed against the judgment of the first appellate court dated 11.2.2013. The first appellate court by the impugned judgment dated 11.2.2013 allowed the appeal filed by the respondent/defendant and set aside the judgment of the trial court dated 15.3.2012 by which the trial court had dismissed the suit for recovery of Rs.1,40,317/- filed by the respondent/plaintiff.
(2.) The facts of the case are that the appellant/defendant gave his bio data to the respondent/plaintiff for getting a job. The respondent/plaintiff runs a placement agency under his sole proprietorship M/s. B.M. Consultancy Services. The appellant/defendant at the time of registering with the respondent/plaintiff signed an agreement dated 27.5.2005, Ex.PW1/1, by which in addition to other amounts, the appellant agreed that he would pay a sum of Rs.80,000/- to the respondent/plaintiff on his getting the job on forwarding by the respondent/plaintiff of his bio data to a company which gives the appellant/defendant employment. Appellant/defendant got a job through the respondent/plaintiff with M/s. Radico Khaitan Limited and confirmation of this placement is proved by the respondent/plaintiff in terms of the letter dated 5.9.2006 of the appellant/defendant, Ex.PW1/2. Respondent/plaintiff claimed that the appellant/defendant did not pay this amount and therefore the subject suit for recovery was filed. Appellant/defendant in the written statement, in preliminary objection No.4, specifically stated that the employer vide its letter dated 21.9.2006 issued to the appellant/defendant clearly stated that the charges of the respondent/plaintiff placement agency will not have to be paid by the appellant/defendant but will be paid by the employer/ M/s. Radico Khaitan Limited and which were in fact paid. This letter is relevant and is therefore reproduced as under:-
(3.) The respondent/plaintiff in the replication filed gave only a general denial with respect to para 4 of the preliminary objection. This para