MANINDRA CH PAUL Vs. STATE OF TRIPURA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The judgment and decree dated 4-1-1999 passed by the learned District Judge, West Tripura, Agartala in Money Appeal No. 11/1997 confirming the judgment and decree dated 18-7-1996 of the learned Civil Judge, Sr. Division, Court No. 2, West Tripura, Agartala passed in Money Suit No. 46/1993, has been assailed in this Second Appeal.

(2.) The appellant herein was the plaintiff in Money Suit No. 46/1993 of the Court of the learned Civil Judge, Sr. Division, Court No. 2, West Tripura, Agartala and the respondents were the defendants in the said suit.

(3.) Facts leading to this appeal are, in a nutshell, that the appellant as plaintiff instituted a Money Suit before the learned trial Court against the respondents (defendants). Before institution of the suit, the appellant's Advocate served notice upon the respondent No. 2 only. The suit was filed due to nonpayment of repairing charges of an office vehicle belonging to the respondent No. 2, which was repaired on the basis of the work orders issued by the respondent No. 3. The respondent No. 2 contested the suit by filing a written statement alleging, inter alia, that the suit was not maintainable, no cause of action arose, hit by principle of estoppel, waiver and acquiescence, barred by law of limitation and also suffers from non-joinder of necessary parties. The respondent No. 2, however, admitted the fact of placing the work orders for repairing the said office vehicle, receipt of bills submitted by the appellant, service of notice dated 19-6-1993 (Exbt. 1) on him and also admitted that the vehicle was fully repaired and the appellant made demands for payment of the repairing charges. However, no document is on record showing that the respondent No. 2 has been authorised to file written statement on behalf of the respondent Nos. 1 and 3.