Bahadur Singh v. Jai Kumar Garg
!"#$"%&'&#()*++
) ,-
+ ./ 0-
!
./ 0- 2
- " ! # $ %& %'
(%)* + ,! -
! + $ .% %) (%)* + ,! , / - 1 ! ! + !!1
(
23!
+!
.
" !!! ! !&4 &%%56/7& %%%56 ).
&%%56 0 " 1
3 ! !7& %%%56! !! 8+
9 *(.*)*)4 %:
(%%:!7& %%%56 ! ! !! ! ! + +
" 8
1
+ 1
;
81 ):
%:
(%%:
!< !! ! # (:
%:
(%%:
1 ! + 1
!
!
"! = 1
+$ +
!
! 1 ;
1 !! 1
!
1!
! 1+ "! 1+ 8!+1 !
" 81 + " 8! +1 *%6'% 1! + ).4!9 += )44)/ !! < #0 "! 1 8 $ .) )% (%)( + =,
= ! 1! "!
3
8
5.
Replication was filed in which the contents of the written statement were denied and those of the plaint were reiterated. 6.
From the pleadings of the parties, the following issues were
framed by the trial Court:- 1.
Whether the plaintiff is entitled for decree for recovery of Rs.58,500/- alongwith interest @ 10% as prayed for ? OPP 2.
Whether the suit of plaintiff is not maintainable ? OPD 3.
Whether the plaintiff has no locus-standi to file the present suit ? OPD 4.
Whether the suit of the plaintiff is time barred ? OPD 5.
Relief.
7.
The parties led their respective evidence.
8.
The trial Court decreed the suit filed by the plaintiff. " ! + 1
!
!
9.
I have heard learned counsel for the appellant and the respondent in person.
10.
Learned counsel for the appellant-defendant submits that both the Courts have erred in decreeing the suit. He submits that in fact the plaintiff was running a Committee and used to take cheques from all members. The plaintiff presented cheques of 60-70 persons which were dishonoured and he filed complaints under Section 138 of the N.I.Act which were also dismissed after which he filed recovery suits against all such persons. Learned counsel submits that for decreeing the suit, the plaintiff was supposed to lead cogent evidence but the Courts decreed his suit on the basis of flimsy evidence led by him and on the contrary ignored the trustworthy evidence led by the defendant.
11.
Per contra, the plaintiff, who is present in person, submits that
there is no error in the judgments passed by the Courts and that the suit filed by the plaintiff was decreed only after considering the evidence led on the record of the case.
12.
= + + ! 6! 1 6 1
).
!
!
, 9 ).:*(6,!(%)* ! + 6 5! ;7)('1 )&),,!
!
! + !!+ 1 ! 8 + 1 !
1 !
! + !!1 1 1 !$ !
)7
2 ! + + +! , 9 + 1 1 +! , 1
! 8 3 1 + " ! + +1 1 + +! , +! 2 , ! ! $ ! !! +3
)&
! ! 8
8 1 >?
@75, = !
8! ! 7& %%%56+ + ! ! + +
"
81 " !!1
, 1 + 8
+ ! > !+ ! 81 +
! 1 1 ! ! + + 1 +
" 8
1 /01 >?
1
6?
"A 1
>?
1 ! ! " 1 +? 1 +
2 ! 3 8+ 3 !+
+! 1
! + + 1 1 + ! 2 1 ! !!1
13 !!
)*
" 8 !! 1 ! $ !,
+
, ! +
)'
, !
!! ! ! = !
!
!
+ !1 ! + $ !
)4
9 1
= 1!+ = !
Pending application(s), if any, stand(s) disposed of accordingly. *++ ./ 0- @3
5 B59 Whether Reportable Yes/No