RSA No. 179 of 2008. Case: Bhagat Ram Vs Bal Krishan. Himachal Pradesh High Court

Case NumberRSA No. 179 of 2008
Party NameBhagat Ram Vs Bal Krishan
CounselFor Appellant: I.S. Chandel, Advocate and For Respondents: Neeraj Gupta, Advocate
JudgesSureshwar Thakur, J.
IssueCivil Procedure Code
Judgement DateMarch 21, 2017
CourtHimachal Pradesh High Court

Judgment:

Sureshwar Thakur, J.

  1. The plaintiff had instituted a suit before the learned trial Court for a recovery of Rs. 1,64,145 from the defendant/appellant herein. The suit of the plaintiff stood decreed by the learned trial Court and in an appeal carried therefrom before the learned First Appellate Court, the latter Court modified the verdict recorded by the learned trial Court. Standing aggrieved therefrom, the defendant/appellant herein has instituted the instant appeal herebefore.

  2. Briefly stated the facts of the case are that the plaintiff is working as an Agent of M/s. BHS Fruit Commission Agency, Delhi. It is averred that On 22nd October, 2001, after settling the amounts with the defendant, the defendant acknowledged his having received an amount of Rs. 1,09,430/- from the plaintiff and duly acknowledged the same by signing the ledger. It is averred that the defendant also agreed to pay 5% interest on the amount till the final payment of the amount. It is averred that the defendant again acknowledged the liability on August 22, 2002 and an amount of 1, 64,145/- had become due against the defendant. However, the defendant did not care to pay the amount to the plaintiff and accordingly, a legal notice was issued on August 28, 2002. The cause of action stated to have arisen on October, 22, 2001 when the amount was acknowledged by the defendant and thereafter on August 28, 2002. Hence this suit.

  3. The defendant contested the suit and filed written statement wherein he had taken preliminary objection qua the plaintiff being not entitled to the interest at the rate of 5%, cause of action and that the alleged ledger, basis of the suit, is not maintained in accordance with law and it is false document. On merits, it is alleged that the defendant had not settled any account with the plaintiff. It is denied that the defendant never acknowledged qua his having received an amount of Rs. 1,09,430/- from the plaintiff. It is also denied that the defendant acknowledged the liability of Rs. 1,64,145/- respectively on 22nd October, 2001 and on August 22, 2002. It is averred that the defendant some time 14-15 years back took empty apple boxes of value of about Rs. 3,000/- and the plaintiff had recovered about Rs. 15,000/- from him by fraud and forcible acts. Hence, he prayed for the dismissal of the suit.

  4. The plaintiff/respondent herein filed replication to the written statement of the defendant/appellant, wherein, he denied the contents of...

To continue reading

Request your trial