FIRM SHIAM LAL JOTI PRASAD Vs. DHANPAT RAI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an appeal arising out of a suit for accounts against the defendants on the ground that the amount claimed is due to the plaintiff on account of certain business transactions carried on with the defendants through the plaintiff's servant. The defence was that the plaintiff had nothing to do with those transactions at all, but that the business was carried on between Chhitar Mal and the defendants, and that accounts were settled between them. The defendants said that they subsequently discovered that the plaintiff claimed to be a partner. The defendants, however, pleaded that Chhitar Mal should be impleaded as pro forma defendant in the suit.

(2.) The Court of first instance framed an issue (No. 4) as to whether Chhitar Mal was or was not a necessary party. After examining the evidence and the statement of Chhitar Mal, who was examined as a witness, the Court came to the conclusion that the story about Chhitar Mal's interest in the business had been concocted to defraud the plaintiff. It also remarked that the evidence shows that Chhittar Mai and the defendants had collusively divided the sale proceeds of the goods in dispute half and half between them in order to deprive the plaintiff of his money. Having come to this conclusion, it was of opinion that Chhitar Mal was not a partner of the plaint in the goods, in dispute and was not a necessary party.

(3.) The claim was accordingly decreed against the defendant.