MANOHAR LAL GUPTA Vs. STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Civil suit No. 5-S/1 of 1996, filed by the Plaintiff Appellant, for recovery of Rs. 2,50,000/- against all the Respondents was dismissed by the learned District Judge, Shimla vide his judgment and decree passed on 15th May, 2000, against which the present appeal has been preferred by him.

(2.) In short, the facts giving rise to the present appeal can be summed up thus. In the year 1988, the Plaintiff-Appellant was Assistant Excise and Taxation Commissioner and he was posted at Bilaspur. Defendant-Respondent No. 4 Yog Raj Sharma was one of the Excise and Taxation Inspectors, serving under the Appellant. The Plaintiff-Appellant averred in his plaint that he was not satisfied with his work and conduct, so he was assigned less important work in the office as compared to the work of excise and sales tax, but even the said Defendant did not work properly and was found negligent in performance of his duties. Many a times, his explanation was called by him, but he had shown no improvement, thus, his matter was reported to the higher authorities and was ultimately charge-sheeted. This offended him and his attitude towards Plaintiff-Appellant became hostile.

(3.) Defendant No. 5 Mast Ram, Advocate remained ex party, whereas the other Defendants-Respondent resisted and contested the suit. Defendants No. 1, 4, 5 and 6 filed separate written statements and Defendants No. 2 and 3 adopted the written statement filed by Defendant No. 1.