CHANDA CHANDRA DASH Vs. NIRANJAN PANDA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a defendant's appeal against a confirming judgment in a suit for compensation for malicious prosecuticm' and the only question that is urged by the appellant's counsel is that the suit is barred by limitation.

(2.) PLAINTIFFS filed the suit alleging that without any basis or any reasonable cause, the defendant who is a veteran litigant prosecuted the plaintiffs by filing a complaint case, being complaint case No. 83 of 1977 on the allegation that while the plaintiffs were cutting paddy on iheir land the defendant demanded for repayment of loan from Gandu and plaintiff No, 1 instigated Gandu not to make any repayment of loan money. Said Gandu was alleged to be a Halia under the plaintiffs. When the defendant objected to such instigation by the plaintiff No. 1, the plaintiffs abused and rushed to assault him and, therefore, the complaint case was filed alleging commission of offences Under Section 504 and 3&2, IPC. The criminal case ended in acquittat and the defendant preferred an appeal. The order of acquittal was confirmed by the High Court on 18 -9 - 1931 and the plaintiffs filed the suit claiming compensation to the tune of Rs. 2500/ -. The suit was filed on 19th of July, 1982.

(3.) ON these pleadings six issues were struck and the parties lad evidence. The learned trial Judge came to the conclusion that the, advancement of loan to Gandu was nothing but a mystery and that the allegation that Gandu was a Halia under the plaintiff was also false. He further held that the criminal case was instituted by the defendant falsely without any reasonable and probable cause. The trial Judge came to the further finding that there was no honest belief in the accusation made by the defendant and the criminal case that was filed by the defendant was actuated by malice to harass the plaintiffs by dragging them to a Court of law taking advantage that one of them stayed more than 100 Krns. away from the Court. He also further found that the actio of the defendant in instituting the complaint case was fulll of reckless - ness and the plaintiffs are entitled to the damages claimed. With these conclusions the suit having been decreed to the tune of Rs. 2500/ - together with interest both pendente lite and future, the defendant carried the matter in appeal. It is to be noticed that though one of the issues before the learned trial Judge which was as to whether the suit is barred by limitation but that issue had not been pressed before the learned trial Judge.