KOPPULA NARAYANAMURTHI Vs. PITTA VENKAMMA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an Appeal against the Judgment of the Subordinate Judge, Rajahmundry, in O.S. No. 50 of 1951, on the file of his Court. The suit was brought by the respondent, (since adjudicated insolvent and represented by the Official Receiver, Rajahmundry), in this appeal, against the present appellant for the recovery of moneys due on khata dealings between them during the period 11 th July, 1946 to 31st December, 1947. Though, according to the khata, a sum of Rs. 17,270-8-6 is found due by the defendant to the plaintiff, a sum of Rs. 8,270-8-6 has been given up and the plaintiff had restricted his claim only to a sum of Rs. 9,000. The case of the plaintiff is as follows :-

(2.) The defendant was a ryot of Yeturu Nagavaram village in the Hyderabad State. He was taking advances of money from the plaintiff for tobacco cultivation. He was sending the tobacco to the plaintiff's shop at Rajahmundry for sale on commission. The plaintiff was selling tobacco and after deducting, the commission due to him, the balance of sale proceeds were credited to the defendant's khata. On nth July, 1946, the balance of the accounts was struck and it was found that a sum of Rs. 16,800 was due from the defendant to the plaintiff. On that date, the defendant executed a promissory note in favour of the plaintiff in the plaintiff's ledger. The dealings between the parties continued subsequently upto 31st December, 1947, by which date a sum of Rs. 17,270-8-6 was found due from the defendant. The plaintiff filed the present suit on 19th December, 1950 for the recovery of Rs. 9,000 as stated already.

(3.) The defendant raised various pleas. He denied the settlement of accounts on nth July, 1946. He denied the execution of the promissory note. He denied also that he was indebted to the plaintiff in a sum of Rs. 16,800 by nth July, 1946. He challenged the correctness of the suit khata. He pleaded that the plaintiff must have illegally mixed up karchi tobacco with the defendant's supply and misappropriated the proceeds of sale from the defendant's tobacco which was of the best variety. The defendant pleaded limitation and denied that the suit khata was a mutual, open and current account.