GULLA KHARAGJIT CARPENTER Vs. NARSINGH NANDKISHORE RAWAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a revision petition under Section 25 of the Small Cause Courts Act. _

(2.) THE petitioner Gulla (hereinafter referred to as 'the applicant') filed a suit against the non-applicant Harisingh for recovery of a sum of Rs. 170 on account of the price of a bullock-cart supplied to him on 3-3-65. The non-applicant (defendant) denied the transaction and the trial Court after considering the evidence on record dismissed the suit on the ground that the case of the plaintiff-applicant was not proved. Being aggrieved by this decision of the trial Court the plaintiff-applicant has filed this revision petition.

(3.) IN this case plaintiff Gulla (P. W. 1) testified that the non-applicant had purchased a bullock-cart from him on credit for Rs. 170 agreeing to pay the price a couple of months later, but he failed to do so in spite of demands. He is corroborated on this point by two witnesses namely, Chhidi (PW2) and Ratanlal (PW3 ). The trial Court found fault with this evidence on the ground of certain minor 'discrepancies and also because there was no documentary evidence in support of the transaction. The Court, however,, failed to take notice of the very material fact that the non-applicant did not go into the witness box to deny the transaction in question on oath. In fact he adduced no evidence in support of his case,