MANNALAL Vs. BIHARILAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is Plaintiffs' second appeal. Their suit for recovery of Rs. 748 -14 -0 has been dismissed by the trial Court and their oppeal against that judgment has been dismissed by the first appellate Court.

(2.) THE three Plaintiffs under the firm -name of Khajulal Chunnilal are carrying on 'Sarafi, Adat' (Commission Agency), and forward transaction business at Maheshwar. The firm is a member and card -holder of die Sarafa Association, Maheshwar. According to the rules of the said association only members can act as 'Adatyas' and the sale and purchase transactions of silver 'Pats' can be carried on througn the agency of the enrolled card -holders.

(3.) THE only question that assumed importance in this case is whether these transactions were wagering contracts or not? The trial Court came to contract that they were wagering contracts and so dismissed the suit. The appellate Court upheld this finding.