S IMAM PEER KHADRI NOOREDARIA Vs. S KHADIJA BI
LAWS(APH)-1963-8-33
HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
Decided on August 21,1963

S.IMAM PEER KHADRI NOOREDARIA Appellant
VERSUS
S.KHADIJA BI Respondents

JUDGEMENT

- (1.) This Second Appeal is directed against the Judgment of the Subordinate Judge at Kurnool, who dismissed the defendants appeal and confirmed the decree for plaintiffs passed by the District Munsif, Adoni.
(2.) The plaintiffs-respondents instituted a suit for an account against the defendant in the Court of the District Munsif, Adoni, on the basis of a contract of agency arising out of a power-of-attorney (Exhibit B-3) dated 29-12-1951 executed by the plaintiffs in favour of the defendant for the management of their estate. The defence was that the defendant had earlier been appointed agent by the deceased mother of the plaintiffs under Exhibit B-5 dated 28-11-1940 for management of the said properties and that he had overpaid the plaintiffs mother and was entitled to an account and reimbursement from the plaintiffs who admittedly inherited the properties from mother. The defendant, therefore, asked that an account be taken for the period beginning from 28-11-1940 and ending with the death of the plaintiffs mother in June 1951 and the amount due to him ascertained and awarded to him. This claim was made by the defendant in the shape of a counter claim in respect of which he paid a court-fee of Rs. 11.00 as though it were a plaint in a suit for rendition of accounts.
(3.) The main question that arose for decision in the Courts below was whether the counter claim raised by the defendant was sustainable. The trial Court held that the counter claim related to a different contract of agency and could not therefore be set up in answer to the plaintiffs action which was based on a separate later contract. Consequently it passed a preliminary decree for accounts in respect of the period covered by Exhibit B-3. The defendant was not satisfied with this preliminary decree. He wanted an account relating to the agency created by the plaintiffs deceased mother to be taken. He, therefore, appealed to the Subordinate Judge, Kurnool. The learned Subordinate Judge dismissed the appeal on the grounds that the defendants counter-claim which related to a different contract was not maintainable and that it was barred by time.;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.