MOTI RAM Vs. DAROPTI ETC

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a plaintiff's regular first appeal directed against the judgment and decree of the Additional District Judge, Faridkot dismissing their suit for the recovery of Rs. 14,500/-. The facts giving rise to the suit as stated in the plaint are that the plaintiffs, proprietors of the dissolved firm Gopal Sahai Raghbar Dayal situated in Barnala Mandi, were carrying on the business of Commission Agents under the name mentioned above and the defendants, Proprietors of the firms Santa Mal Pitamber Parshad and Bashamber Nath Oil Mills, Chandausi carry on the business under the names just mentioned. The defendants entered into the following forward transactions through the commission agency of the plaintiff-firm at Barnala during the period beginning from 1st December, 1948 and ending with 10th March, 1949.

(2.) On settlement of the above transaction, the defendants suffered a loss of Rs. 23,196/7/- which are due to the plaintiffs in addition to the incidental expenses incurred by the plaintiffs on behalf of the defendants. The plaintiffs received from the defendants a sum of Rs. 8,850/- through hundis and Rs. 2,500/- in cash in all amounting to Rs. 11,350/- on different dates upto 25th October, 1951 (Katik Badi 10, Sambat 2008). The plaintiff also incurred miscellaneous expenses regarding hundis and telegrams amounting to Rs. 398/13/9. Entries regarding these business dealings were duly made in Khata bahi, rokar bahi, nakal bahi and khata saodajat naka bahi maintained by the plaintiffs as required by the usage prevailing in Barnala Mandi. After deducting the amount received, the balance outstanding due from the defendants has been claimed to be Rs. 12,245/4/9. Adding to this sum interest at the rate of Rs. -/8/- per cent per mensem in accordance with the usage, which comes to Rs. 2,254/13/4, in all the total amount of Rs. 14,500/- has been claimed to be due from the defendants to the plaintiffs and it is for this amount that the suit was instituted.

(3.) On behalf of the defendants, separate written statements were filed, one by Bashamber Nath and the second by Pitamber Parshad. Both of them however, contained objections on the basis of merits as also non-registration of the plaintiff-firm under the Indian Partnership Act. Pitamber Parshad was stated by Bishember Nath in his written statement to be the Proprietor of the firm Santa Mal Pitamber Parshad situate at Chandausi. Bishamber Nath himself disclaiming all concern with the said firm. Bishamber Nath also denied that the firm Bishamber Nath Oil Mills had over entered into any transaction with the plaintiff-firm.