VIJAYVARGIYA DAL MILLS Vs. HAJI ISMAIL HAJI WALI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE defendant from Regular Civil Suit No.550/1979 has filed this revision application against the order passed by the learned IIIrd Additional District Judge, Aurangabad, on 11-6-1991, in Miscellaneous Civil Appeal No.120/1986. THE present respondent filed the Civil Suit for recovery of Rs. 19498-13 Paise, contending that he has sold Turdal to the defendant and out of the total price of Rs. 55,400/- amount of Rs. 15,878/- was yet to be received from the defendant. So, the said amount plus interest was claimed by the plaintiff.

(2.) THE defendant, present petitioner, in the written statement took the stand that there was no privity of contract between the plaintiff and the defendant regarding transaction of said Turdal and also took the stand that the Court of Civil Judge at Aurangabad had no territorial jurisdiction to entertain the suit. THE learned Civil Judge (senior Division), Aurangabad, by his judgment and order dated 31-7-1986 held that there was no transaction between the plaintiff and the defendant with respect to sale of Turdal on credit of the value of Rs. 55,400/- But he further held that the plaintiff had proved that the defendant had paid Rs. 39,522/- and failed to pay the balance of Rs. 15,878/ -. He also held that the plaintiff was entitled to recover from the defendant Rs. 15,878/- with interest thereon at the rate of one and half per cent per month. He also held that the plaintiff was not entitled to claim Rs. 500/- being the expenses incurred for recovery of the said amount.

(3.) IT is the contention of the petitioner that the defendant had no direct contract with the plaintiff regarding the transaction of purchase of Turdal. The defendant had purchased 100 bags of Turdal on 9-2-1979 at the rate of Rs. 270/- per quintal from his broker Mangilal Omprakash, Canvassing Agent, Indore and the broker had informed the defendant that the Turdal sold to him belonged to Haji Ismail Wali Mohammad from Aurangabad. The goods were purchased by the defendant at Indore and the delivery was also received at Indore through Roshan Transport, Aurangabad. The goods might have been despatched by the plaintiff. The transaction was described as "bilty - Cut Indore delivery". IT means that the delivery was given at Indore at the cost of Haji Ismail Wali Mohammad. The defendant made payment to Mangilal Omprakash by cheques and the 'vouchers were obtained from broker. All these payments were made at Indore. Thus, no part of transaction had taken place at Aurangabad and, therefore, no cause of action has arisen within the jurisdiction of Civil Court at Aurangabad.