FIRM RAMCHAND BHAGIRATH Vs. GANPAT RAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a defendants' second appeal and is directed against the appellate decree of the District Judge Ganganagar, confirming the decree of the Civil Judge, Suratgarh in a suit instituted by the respondent Ganpatram for the recovery of R.s. 4038/4/9.

(2.) THE case of Ganpatram is that he brought foodgrain on 24th, 26th and 27th May, 1959 for sale to the shop of the defendants in Hanumangarh, who were commission agents. According to him, after deduction of the incidental charges and the commission of the defendants, the sale price due to him was Rs. 4038/4/9 When he asked for the money, the defendants did not pay the amount. In the first instance, he filed a criminal complaint for criminal breach of trust, but it was dismissed on the ground that the matter involved a case of civil nature Accordingly, he instituted Suit No. 96/62 in the court of Civil Judge. Suratgarh for the recovery of the amount.

(3.) LEARNED Counsel for the appellants has argued that Kesoram was one of the partners of the Firm Ramchand Bhagirath. He was a necessary party. It was also contended that Kesoram had been paid the price of the foodgrain received from the plaintiff. the learned Judge of the first appellate court held that even if Kesoram was a partner, that would not make the suit incompetent against the firm and other partner of the Firm. As regards the payment to Kesoram, it is (sic) that the alleged payment of Rs. 4038/4/9 said to have been paid to Kesoram is not a valid discharge of payment to the plaintiff. This contention has no substance and I agree with the finding of the first appellate court.