PRAKASH CHANDRA Vs. BASANTI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This civil regular first appeal is preferred by plaintiff assailing validity and propriety of judgment and decree dated 11-12-1995 whereby learned District Judge, Dungarpur rejected the suit for re covery of money

(2.) The facts necessary for adjudication of appeal, as mentioned in the plaint, are that appellant plaintiff purchased a truck with partnership of Shn Camera (defendant) For the purpose of purchase of truck plaintiff as well as defendant both were required to include equal share of purchasing amount Defendant Camera was not having money at the relevant time, therefore, the plaintiff paid the sum of Rs 61,501/- as a part money required to be paid by Camera to Rehman Bhai from whom the truck was said to be purchased It is further stated in the plaint that Shn Camera (defendant) executed the bond on 5-11-1982 in favour of the appellant stating therein that the amount of Rs 61,501 / was paid to RehmanBhai by plaintiff Prakash Chandra on behalf of defendant and, therefore, defendant shall be liable for repayment of money to plaintiff Prakash Chandra

(3.) A written statement was filed on behalf of defendant denying all the allegations However, it was stated that the truck was purchased by Camera at his own at the cost of Rupees 75,000/- and for this purpose one Shn Banshilal financed a sum of Rs 50,000 to him. The defendant stated in the written statement that the bond dated 5-11-1982 was never executed by him and the same is a forged document