Daljit Singh And Ors vs M/S Ralla Ram Banarsi Dass
2024 Latest Caselaw 7841 P&H

Punjab-Haryana High Court

Daljit Singh And Ors vs M/S Ralla Ram Banarsi Dass on 15 April, 2024

Author: Anil Kshetarpal

Bench: Anil Kshetarpal

                                      Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:050775




                                              2024:PHHC:050775
109 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
                  AT CHANDIGARH
                           RSA-2901-1994 (O&M)
                           Date of decision: 15.04.2024

Daljit Singh and others
                                                    ....Appellants
              Versus

M/s Ralla Ram Banarsi Dass
                                                   ..Respondent

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KSHETARPAL

Present:-     Mr. Vikas Singh, Advocate for the appellants

ANIL KSHETARPAL, J (Oral)

1. This is the defendants' Regular Second Appeal against the

judgment passed by the First Appellate Court, which in turn has reversed

the judgment and decree passed by the trial court while decreeing the

plaintiff's suit for recovery of Rs.1,16,262.35 alongwith interest at the

rate of 6% per annum on the principal amount of Rs.74,838.50 from the

date of suit till its realization.

2. In order to comprehend the issues involved in the present

case, some relevant facts, in brief, are required to be noticed.

3. The plaintiff is a commission agent whereas the defendants

are farmers who used to sale their produce through the plaintiff and

borrow amount from time to time. On 20.05.1986, the plaintiff-firm

filed a suit claiming that the defendants have failed to pay the principal

amount of Rs.74,838.50 alongwith interest. Defendant no.1 contested

the suit and claimed that he had not taken any loan. He has sold crops

for value more than the amount claimed in the suit, however, the

plaintiff-firm has not paid the amount. The trial court dismissed the suit

1 of 2

Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:050775

RSA-2901-1994 (O&M) 2 2024:PHHC:050775

on the ground that the plaintiff has failed to prove that the account books

were maintained in regular course of business. However, the First

Appellate Court upon re-appreciation of evidence decreed the suit.

4. Heard the learned counsel representing the parties at length

and with their able assistance perused the paperbook alongwith the

scanned copy of the lower court record.

5. Learned counsel representing the appellants submits that J

Form dated 10.5.1983 and 06.05.1984 produced by the defendants have

not been accounted for. Hence, the judgment passed by the First

Appellate Court is not sustainable. From a perusal of the judgment

passed by the First Appellate Court, it is evident that the plaintiff failed

to prove the aforesaid J Form. It has come in evidence that on

31.05.1983 the defendant no.1 borrowed Rs.1,16,000/- by way of two

different entries of Rs.84,000/- and Rs.32,000/-. Each and every entry

made in the account books evidencing borrowing the amount is signed

by defendant no.1 but of course he denies the same. However, his

signatures have been proved with the help of handwriting and finger

print expert.

6. Keeping in view the aforesaid facts, no ground to interfere

is made out.

7. Hence, dismissed.

8. All the pending miscellaneous applications, if any, are also

disposed of.

15.04.2024                                          (ANIL KSHETARPAL)
rekha                                                     JUDGE
Whether speaking/reasoned :    Yes/No
Whether reportable :           Yes/No




                                    2 of 2