KISTOORMAL Vs. LACHHMA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) A decree for Rs. 1848/1/ - was passed by the Additional Civil Judge, Jaipur City against four defendants, viz. defendant No. Phoolcband, President, defendant No. 2 Harinarayan Rathi Secretary, defendant No. 3 Bhonri Lal Join -Secretary, and defendant No. 4 Kisturmal Treasurer of the Raj Industrial and Crafts Exhibition organised at Atish, Tripdtiya Bazar, Jaipur on account of hire charges and price of certain articles supplied by the plaintiff -respondents at the exhibition.

(2.) PHOOLCHAND and Bhonrilal were satisfied with the decree and did not file appeal. An appeal was filed by Hari Narayan and Kistoor Mal and that too was dismissed by the District Judge, Jaipur City. Consequently the said two defendants have come in second appeal.

(3.) IT may be pointed out that in the Calcutta case a cooperative society had been fo med under the Bengal Co -operative Societies Act, even though the Society was not registered. Admittedly the present is not a case of Coopera -tive Society. It appears to be a case where more than two persons had under taken a joint venture of organising an exhibition. Consequently the Calcutta case has no application to the facts and circumstances of the presenS case. It further appears that the appellants along with other persons organised the exhibition in partnership and their liability for the suit amount is therefore joint and several. Hari Narayan and Bhonri Lal entered into the contract for taking the articles on hire. Kistoor Mal issued two cheques Ex. 24 and Ex. 25, in lieu of payments due to the plaintiffs. There is over -whelming evidence from the side of the plaintiffs that all the four defendents had jointly organised the exhibition and had consequently pecuniary interest in its success or failure. They have thus been rightly held liable for the suit amount.