VENKAT RAJU Vs. REDDI OIL MILLS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The first defendant-appellant laid a counter-claim in a suit riled by the respondent, for a sum of Rs. 3,500/- for breach of contract for supply of 250 tins of DNG Oil (Double Refined Ground-nut Oil). The counter claim was dismissed by the Court below on the ground that it has no pecuniary jurisdiction to entertain the claim. Thus the appeal.

(2.) The facts not in dispute found by the Court below and accepted by the parties are as follows : The respondent laid the suit for recovery of Rs. 24,000/- towards the value of the goods supplied viz., Solvent Extracts Ground-nut Refined Oil (SEGN Oil) In that suit, the appellant pleaded while denying the contract on which the respondent rests his case, that on April 26, 1977, he placed order for supply of 500 tins of DRGN Oil at the rate of Rs. 154/- per tin, and 250 tins of oil was supplied under invoicesExs. B-1 to B-9, In the mean while, the prices have gone upto Rs. 168/- per tin. For the non-supply thereof respondent committed breach of contract. Accordingly, while filing the writen statement on January 20, 1978, he laid counter claim for a sum of Rs, 3,500/-. The Court below accepted that the appellant placed orders for supply of 500 tins of BRGN Oil and the respondent committed breach of supply and so the appellant is entitled to Rs. 3,500/- but held that since it is a distinct cause of action, that Court has no jurisdiction to entertain the counter-claim. Accordingly it dismissed the counter-claim. The respondent though served, is not appearing either in person or through counsel.

(3.) Order 8 Rule 6 C.P.C. provides particulars of set-off to be pleaded in a written statement thus :