LAKSHMINARAYAN Vs. SURAJMAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS second appeal arises from an appellate order of the Divisional Commissioner, Kotah who confirmed the decree of the trial court allowing compensatory costs amounting to Rs. 50/-, against the appellant plaintiff.

(2.) WE have heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties and have examined the record of the case. The main contention of the learned counsel for the appellant is that the trial court as well as the lower appellate court acted illegally in awarding compensatory costs to the defendant-respondents against the plaintiff-appellant contrary to the provisions of Rule 54 (2) of the Rules made under sec. 8 of the Revenue Courts Procedure and Jurisdiction Act read with sec. 35 (a) of the C.P.C. This contention must prevail. In order that compensatory costs be allowed to the defendants against the plaintiff, the following conditions must exist: (i) The claim or defence must be false or vexatious. (ii) It must be false or vexatious to the knowledge of the party raising it. (iii) Such claim or defence must have been disallowed or withdrawn or abandoned in whole or in part. (iv) Objection must have been taken at the earliest possible opportunity. None of these conditions exist in the present case. In their defence, the defendants neither pleaded any of these grounds nor raised this objection at any stage of the proceeding to the effect that the claim was false or vexatious. None of the courts below also gave any reasons as to whether they considered the claim as false or vexatious. In the absence of any valid reasons, the trial court as well as the lower-appellate court were not competent to award compensatory costs to the defendant-respondents. A.I.R. 1926 Lahore Page 472, and A.I.R. (30) 1943 Madras Page 286 are authority on this point. The decree given by the lower-appellate-court therefore deserves to be modified to the extent that the plaintiff-appellant cannot be saddled with Rs. 50/- as compensatory costs to be paid to the defendant-respondents and the appeal is allowed to this extent.