SK ILIMADDIN Vs. SKABIDULLAH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this case I am convinced that the judgment is not a proper one and there has not been a proper trial. The plaintiff, who is the petitioner before me, sued the defendants for recovery of a sum of Rs. 135 on the basis that he had deposited with the plaintiff a sum of Rs. 120 and Rs. 15 is claimed as compensation. Two witnesses were examined on behalf of the plaintiff and two on behalf of the defendant. Their evidence as recorded by the Small Cause Court Judge runs as follows: Plaintiff Ilimaddi proves the claim, I made first demand after three years of the deposit, P.W. 2, Mahamad Ali: Plaintiff demanded. Defendant admitted in last Falgun. Defendant Abidali; denies the deposit and the liability. Defendant 2 denies the deposit and the liability.

(2.) This is the whole of the evidence as recorded. In the judgment the learned Judge says this: "Plaintiff during trial however makes out a case of his wages remaining due". Then he makes another remark: Besides from the evidence and circumstances I am quite convinced that neither any deposit was made of cash money to the defendants, nor did the plaintiff work as field servant under defendant during 1335 and 1336 B. 8. The case is totally false and has been instigated by Ebrahim with whom the defendants have got enmity.

(3.) In the deposition of the plaintiff, as recorded, I do not find that he served the defendant during 1335 and 1336 B.S. Even that statement is not in his plaint. Then the learned Judge proceeds to find against the plaintiff from the evidence and circumstances. What those circumstances are I am at a loss to find out from the record for, in the evidence as recorded, there are no circumstances indicated from which that conclusion could be arrived at. Then the last sentence of his judgment is that the case is totally false and has been instigated by the defendants out of enmity. In the evidence, which has been recorded by the learned Judge, there is nothing to support the statement. A Small Cause Court Judge is not bound to record the evidence in extenso, but it is, in my judgment, incumbent upon a Small Cause Court Judge to record such statements of witnesses, or to make a summary of those statements in the deposition, as recorded, on which he relies in his judgment. I accordingly, hold that the judgment is not supported by the evidence as recorded, and the evidence has not been recorded in such a way as to enable this Court to form any opinion as to the respective cases of the parties before the Court, and on what material circumstances, as I have pointed out above, that the learned Judge has relied upon in support of his judgment. Those facts and circumstances ought to have been noted by him when he was recording the evidence of the witnesses, who came and deposed before him. I accordingly set aside the judgment of the learned Small Cause Court Judge and send back the case for retrial: the witnesses to be produced by the parties are to be examined afresh and the learned Small Cause Court Judge will proceed to record the evidence in accordance with the principles which I have indicated above. The Rule is made absolute: hearing fee is assessed at one gold mohur to abide the result.