STATE OF PUNJAB Vs. HAMIR SINGH LAMBARDAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision petition arises out of a suit instituted by Gulab Singh plaintiff (respondent therein) for recovery of a sum of Rs. 467.65 paise from the petitioner State and Hamir Singh Lambardar (respondent No. 1 herein).

(2.) The case set up by the plaintiff in the plaint was that he had been advanced a taccavi loan of Rs. 800/- by the petitioner State; that he had paid a sum of Rs. 519.84 Paise and Rs. 31.68 Paise, totalling Rs. 551.52 Paise, in the treasury on 18.2.1964; that another sum of Rs. 380.48 Paise had already been paid to the Tehsildar on 23.6.1963 who had further entrusted the said amount to Hamir Singh Lambardar, respondent No. 1 with the direction to deposit the same in the treasury and also got issued a receipt scribed by the Patwari and signed by the said Hamir Singh, that by paying the aforesaid sums, he had paid the taccavi loan in its entirety along with interest, but despite that fact the petitioner State under duress recovered from him a sum of Rs. 280.16 Paise as the principal amount of arrears and Rs. 187.52 Paise as interest thereon, totalling Rs. 467.68 Paise, on 25.5.1968.

(3.) Hamir Singh, respondent No. 1 had admitted the fact that the sum of Rs. 380.48 Paise had been entrusted to him for being deposited in the treasury the said amount to one Rajinder Prashad Clerk under the order of the Tehsildar against receipt. It appears that the plaintiff in his evidence had stated that he had paid the amount directly to Hamir Singh, respondent No. 1, and not indirectly through the Tehsildar. In view of the fact that the plaintiff had directly entrusted the amount in question to Hamir Singh lambardar and had not paid the same to the Tehsildar or deposited in the treasury, the learned trial Subordinate Judge held that no decree could be passed against the State, as only Hamir Singh lambardar to whom the sum was paid was liable in case the said amount did not reach the Government treasury. Accordingly, a decree against him was passed.