DILAWAR SINGH Vs. PAWAN KUMAR VIKRAM KUMAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Counsel for both the parties submit that as the record of the case has been burnt, the photocopies of the record supplied are authenticated and that they have got no objection in case the record is reconstructed on the basis of the material produced.

(2.) The record is reconstructed on the basis of the material supplied. The petition has been taken up for adjudication with the consent of the parties.

(3.) The petitioner is a defendant in a case of recovery of money borrowed by the petitioner, filed by the plaintiff-respondent M/s Pawan Kumar Vikram Kumar, Commission Agent, Abohar. The defendant-petitioner in his written statement has taken up a plea that the plaintiff-respondent firm is not maintaining proper account books and that the plaintiff-respondent has not accounted for the amounts of the agricultural produce sold by the defendant-petitioner and his father as well as brother through the agency of the plaintiff respondent and of sale of land measuring 22 kanals having market value of 10 lacs in favour of persons of plaintiff-respondent as per the asking of the plaintiff-respondent by way of execution of sale deed. It is also pleaded that father of the petitioner had sold agricultural produce vide Form-J dated 9.11.1998, 1.12.1998, 4.1.1999 and 11.1.1999, through the Commission Agency of the plaintiff-respondent and the plaintiff-respondent issued forms through its sister concern M/s Hans Raj Anil Kumar. Similarly, the petitioner has also obtained copies of Form-J dated 04.05.2002 and 17.05.2002, from the Market Committee, Abohar as the plaintiff respondent refused to supply the same. The specific plea taken by the defendant-petitioner in the written statement is that the plaintiff- respondent did not pay any sale consideration to the defendant petitioner against the sale deed despite repeated requests and demands of the defendant-petitioner and never rendered accounts to the defendant-petitioner. The entry dated 03.08.2004 for Rs. 1,25,000/- in the name of the defendant-petitioner is forged and fabricated.