DOMINION OF INDIA Vs. MATHURA PRASAD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Both these revisions may be conveniently disposed of by one judgment, as the points involved are common to both of them though the facts are different. Two suits were filed in which the plaintiffs claimed certain sums of money as unpaid value of value Payable Parcels sent by them to different persons through the defendant.

(2.) In Small Cause Court Suit No. 31 of 1930 out of which Civil Revision No. 363 of 195] has arisen, the plaintiff Mamma Prasad claimed Rs. 76-12-0 as unpaid value of four Value Payable Parcels alleged to have been sent by him to different persons through the defendant. The details of the above Value Payable Parcels arc as follows:-1.

(3.) The suit was contested, inter alia, on the ground that the value payable in respect of the Value Payable Parcels Nos. 278 and 1739 had been paid to the plaintiff. As regards Nos. 1514 and 149, it was pleaded that no money was realised by the defendant, so it was not liable for it. It was further stated that the papers relating to No. 1514 were not traceable and the money realised for Value Payable Parcel No. 149 was withheld by the Pakistan Government due to some monetary dead-lock. The defendant not having actually received the amount could not be held liable for its payment to the plaintiff. Want of a valid notice and limitation were also pleaded.