RAJ KISHORE SAHAY Vs. BINOD KUMAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal, by the sole original plaintiff, is directed against the judgment dated 6-1-1977 and the decree signed on 19-1-1977 passed in Money Suit No. 107/61 of 1973/76 Shri Hirday Narain. IInd Additional Subordinate Judge. Ranchi dismissing the suit with cost. On the death of the sole appellant during the pendency of this appeal his heirs have since been substituted.

(2.) The case of the original plaintiff in short is that he is the Bahnoi of the defendant 2 and Phupha of defendant 1. The relationship between the parties was very cordial and the plaintiff had absolute faith on the defendants. In the month of June July, 1969 defendant 1 who happens to be respondent 1 in the present appeal went to United States of America for higher studies on a scholarship. The plaintiff wanted to purchase an American car "IMPALA''. For this purpose in August, 1969 he wrote a letter to defendant 1 enquiring from him about the rules regarding the purchase of such a vehicle from the United States of America. In reply defendant 1 assured the plaintiff that there would be no difficulty in the matter but he sent an incomplete copy of the rules (Ext.1) relating to the purchase and import of an American Car by an Indian Citizen. The plaintiff believed the representation of defendant 1 as true and asked him to proceed in the matter. In his letter of August, 1969 the plaintiff has enquired from defendant 1 whether it would be possible for him to bring the car to India for the use of the plaintiff after obtaining the necessary import licence and to get its ownership transferred to the plaintiff.

(3.) At the instance of defendant 1 plaintiff paid a sum of Rs. 7,500/- equivalent to 1000 Dollars to defendant 2 for meeting the expenses over the sending of defendant No. 1's wife and son to America, on the understanding that the said amount would be adjusted towards the purchase price of the car. The plaintiff had another relation namely Dr. Shrivastava in United States of America. The plaintiff suggested to defendant 1 that in case of any difficulty in purchasing and bringing of the car to India he should handover this amount of 1000 dollars to Dr. Shrivastava for the same purpose. Defendant 1, however informed the plaintiff that since Dr. Shrivastava had already acquired American Citizenship it was not possible for him to leave behind the car in India. Accordingly the plaintiff got sum of 2000 dollars equivalent to Rs.15,000/- paid to defendant 1 through Dr. Shrivastava for the purpose of enabling him to purchase the required car. By his letter dated 6-4-1971 (Ext.1/c) defendant 1 acknowledged the receipt of 1000 dollars and 2000 dollars mentioned above. Defendant 1 had represented that the car in question will cost 4275 dollars and 35 cents. Accordingly. through Ext.1/C defendant 1 asked the plaintiff to pay a sum of Rupees 9565/- being the rupee equivalent of the remaining 1275 dollars and 35 cents to defendant 2 which the plaintiff did. Whenever the plaintiff asked defendant 1 to speed up the matter defendant 1 assured him to remain absolutely carefree and need not worry in the least for the same.