CHAUDHRI HIRA RAM Vs. JAGIR SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This judgment of mine would dispose of R.S.A. No. 199 of 1966 filed by Hira Ram and R.S.A. No. 369 of 1966 filed by Jagir Singh, as both these appeals arise out of a single judgment of the learned Additional District Judge, Hoshiarpur, dated 22nd October, 1965.

(2.) So far as the facts are concerned the same have been succinctly narrated in the judgment of the learned Additional District Judge, and as stated at the bar there is no dispute on these facts.

(3.) Mr. Mittal, learned counsel appearing for the appellant in the appeal filed by Jagir Singh (who has since died and whose legal representatives have been brought on record) has raised only one contention before me, i.e. that the agreement, Exhibit P.I., was void as both the parties to the agreement were under a mistake as to a matter of fact essential to the agreement. According to the learned counsel admittedly, the parties were under a wrong impression that Kishan Singh's compensation of the claim was to the tune of Rs. 1453/- when admittedly it was Rs. 2989/-. In support of his contention the learned counsel has pressed into service the provisions of Section 20 of the Indian Contract Act, which reads as under :-