KAJIRAMKULAM PRASANNA CHITTY Vs. KRISHNA NADAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Appellant is the defendant in a suit for recovery of money. The trial court, after considering the oral and documentary evidence, dismissed the suit holding that the appellant/plaintiff had not succeeded in establishing her case.

(2.) The plaintiff claimed that she had been conducting chitty business in the name and style of "Prasanna Chit Fund" for the last several years. The defendant, a close relative of the plaintiff, had been working in the establishment as a clerk. But he was put in charge of the entire business. The plaintiff alleged that the defendant had fabricated several chitty bonds in the name of subscribers and misappropriated huge sums of money shown in the bonds. The subscribers were not paid amounts shown in those bonds. When the plaintiff got the accounts of the business audited, the above defalcation came to light. According to the plaintiff, a total sum of Rs. 1,50,500/- covered under Ext.A3 series of chitty bonds, totalling to 24 in number, was misappropriated by the defendant. The said amount was sought to be recovered from him in the suit.

(3.) The suit was resisted by the defendant contenting inter alia that he was not in charge of the business in the firm as alleged by the plaintiff. He had been discharging the duties of clerk as per instructions of the plaintiff who had been in overall control and charge of the chitty business. He further denied the allegation that he had anything to do with Ext.A3 series of bonds. All transactions in the firm were being under direct supervision of the plaintiff herself and all accounts were being maintained by her. In short, the defendant contended that all the allegations made against him in the plaint were totally baseless and incorrect and he had not misappropriated any money as alleged. He, therefore, prayed for dismissal of the suit.