M J POWELL Vs. AEHART

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal arises out of a suit brought by the plaintiff to recover damages for malicious prosecution. The plaintiff claimed Rs. 9,000. The Court below has awarded Rs. 3,000. What gave rise to the present suit was a complaint made by the defendant which will be found at page 7 of the appellant s book. It is as follows: The complaint states as follows: 1. That your petitioner engaged the accused to supervise the work of her contractor and agreed to pay him for his remuneration at the rate of 10 per cent. on the contractor s bill.

(2.) That the complainant went away to Saharanpur District after having given the accused charge of the work.

(3.) That the accused turned the contractor away from the work before obtaining a formal sanction from your petitioner, which was obtained by misrepresenting the true facts. This the complainant did in a way under compulsion as she could not afford to come up and supervise the work herself.