CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER, UTTARKASHI, KHADI EVAM VILLAGE INDUSTRY BOARD, DEHRADUN AND OTHERS Vs. NAND KUMAR AGRAWAL (DECEASED) & OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal has been directed against the judgment and order dated 28.11.2008 rendered by the Additional District Judge, Haldwani, Nainital, whereby the Original Suit No. 8/1990 instituted by Mr. Nand Kumar Agrawal against Uttar Pradesh Khadi Gramodyog Board (hereinafter referred to as the Board ) was decreed with costs and the defendant Board was directed to pay Rs. 34,837.50 along with 9 per cent simple interest.

(2.) Having heard the learned Counsels of either parties, the brief facts, sans unnecessary details, are that Mr. Agrawal approached the Board to commence the small scale industry in order to produce the mustard oil by installation of the appropriate machinery known as Power Dhania Machine in his building. The Board sanctioned installation of machines therefor worth Rs. 42,150/- on 1.5.1982. Mr. Agrawal had to pay regular instalment of such amount which was in the shape of a loan in terms of installation of said machinery. The production could start on 3.3.1984, but eventually the machines developed some technical fault and ceased to function. Written complaint was moved by Mr. Agrawal on 9.7.1984 which was responded by a return letter of 23.8.1984, but no care for putting the machinery in order was ever taken by the Board. Mr. Agrawal kept on sending several letters, such as dated 7.12.1984, 28.4.1984, 9.3.1985, 18.5.1986 and so on. Then the Board could take some trouble and sent its invigilator Mr. Shyam Bihari to examine the veracity of the version of Mr. Agrawal. However, no mechanic was ever sent to set the machines in order, with the result Mr. Agrawal could not be benefitted with the rebate of 25 per cent on the whole amount of borrowed money for such machines. Meanwhile, he had to pay two instalments of Rs. 6050/- in addition to the interest of Rs. 1702/-. When the machines ceased to function, then Mr. Agrawal also became helpless in making the payments.

(3.) It has been apprised by the learned Counsel for the respondents that such machines are still in the premise of Mr. Agrawal and thus their building is unnecessarily occupied with the same.