STATE OF RAJASTHAN Vs. SINDHI FILM EXCHANGE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a revision application by the defendant under sec. 23 of the Rajasthan Small Cause Courts Ordinance, 1950 (Ordinance No. VIII of 1950) from the judgment and decree by Judge, Small Cause Court, Jaipur City, dated 18-5-70 by which an ex parte decree for Rs. 500/- was passed against the petitioner.

(2.) TWO points have been argued in support of the revision application. It is submitted in the first instance that the Small Cause Court had no jurisdiction to try the suit and secondly it is argued that there is absolutely no legal evidence on which the decree can be sustained.

(3.) IN the present case, the essence of the matter is that the Government had committed a breach of contract. The letter issued by the Assistant Engineer only demonstrates the alleged breach and does not entail any further consequences. IN the Oudh case (supra) the INspector General of Prisons had not only cancelled the tender but had forfeited the security amount and, therefore, the order was of much consequence. On going through the letter Ex. 4. I am inclined to think that it is a communication by the Assistant Engineer to the plaintiff that for certain reasons the Government was not prepared to stick to the contract. The suit for damages could be maintainable in the present case even if no specific act of an officer as evidenced by Ex. 4 was alleged. Thus the essence of the matter in the present case is breach of the contract on the part of the Government and the suit cannot be said to be a suit concerning any act or order purporting to be done or made by any officer of the Government in his official capacity.