TIRATH RAM Vs. DHARAM DASS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The instant Regular Second Appeal has arisen against the impugned judgement of the learned District Judge, Kullu rendered in Civil Appeal No. 14/2003, whereby the latter partly allowed the appeal of the defendant/appellant herein to the extent of the plaintiff/respondent herein being declared therein to be entitled to recover Rs. 1,15,000/ - along with interest at the rate of 9% per annum from the date of contract till the date of decision with future interest at the rate of 6% per annum till payment in nullification of the judgment and decree of the learned trial Court whereby it declared the respondent herein/plaintiff to be entitled to a sum of Rs. 1,70,000/ -along with interest @ 6% per annum from the date of institution of the suit till its realization. Standing aggrieved by the judgement of the learned District Judge, Kullu, the defendant/appellant herein has instituted the instant Regular Second Appeal before this Court assailing it.

(2.) Briefly stated the facts of the case are that the plaintiff was owner of a rope -way, which was sold by him to the defendant for a sale consideration of Rs. 1,25,000/ -. That the total sale consideration was to be paid by the defendant within one year of its purchase. It is further the case of the plaintiff that after its purchase, the defendant after dismantling the rope -way installed it between villages Trashi and Jong. The defendant failed to pay the sale consideration despite several oral requests having been made by the plaintiff. Thereafter, notice was issued to the defendant but despite service of notice, the defendant did not pay the price of the rope -way, hence, the suit for recovery.

(3.) The defendant contested the suit by fling written statement, wherein he has taken preliminary objections vis   -vis cause of action. On merits, the purchase of rope -way by the defendant from the plaintiff in the year 1998 for consideration of Rs. 1,25,000/ - is denied but it is admitted that the said rope way was shifted and installed between villages Trashi and Jong. However, it is averred that the rope -way was shifted by the plaintiff himself and the defendant was employed as Manager on wages of Rs. 10,000/ - per annum for 1998 and 1999. The plaintiff paid wages for the year 1998 but did not pay the wages for the year 1999 on the pretext of suffering loss, hence, prayed for dismissal of the suit.