STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH Vs. RAJA RAM LAL
LAWS(ALL)-1965-2-5
HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
Decided on February 05,1965

STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH Appellant
VERSUS
RAJA RAM LAL Respondents


Referred Judgements :-

CHAMPAKLAL MOHANLAL V. NECTAR TEA CO. [REFERRED TO]



Cited Judgements :-

STATE OF MAHARASHTRA VS. SARVODAYA INDUSTRIES [LAWS(BOM)-1974-7-2] [REFERRED TO]
SATYAPA VS. SLICK AUTO ACCESSORIES PVT LTD [LAWS(DLH)-2014-3-206] [REFERRED TO]


JUDGEMENT

D.S. Mathur, J. - (1.)THIS is a revision under Section 115, C. P. C. by the State of Uttar Pradesh and the Chief Engineer, Irrigation Department, U. P. Lucknow, defendants, against the order, dated 3-12-1962 of the Civil Judge of Varanasi, allowing the appeal of Raja Ram Lal, plaintiff, and thereby holding that me present suit was cognizable by the Courts at Varanasi.
(2.)THE plaintiff was employed as an Overseer in the Irrigation Department of the State of Uttar Pradesh. He was first of all appointed to this post on October 18, 1945, but his services were terminated on October 21, 1950. He was re-employed on 12-10-1951, and his services were again terminated with effect from 5-7-1958. THE plaintiff is a resident of Varanasi, and during his two terms of service was not employed there. THE plaintiff filed the present suit for the recovery of arrears of salary and the arrears of travelling allowances and also for the refund of the security of Rs. 500 furnished by him.
Prior to the institution of the suit the plaintiff served a notice under Section 80, C. P. C. on the Collector of Varanasi, apparently, to give jurisdiction to the Courts at that place. It was for this reason that the State of Uttar Pradesh was impleaded through the Collector of Varanasi.

The defendants raised an objection to the jurisdiction of the City Munsif of Varanasi, and the Munsif recorded the finding that the suit was not cognizable by the Courts at Varanasi, and, therefore, directed the return of the plaint for presentation to a proper Court. The plaintiff went up in appeal against the order and the Civil Judge hearing the appeal recorded the finding that the suit for the recovery of the security money was maintainable at Varanasi on the application of the general rule that a debtor must seek his creditor, and that the total claim was cognizable by the Courts at Varanasi for the reason that the notice under Section 80, C. P. C. was given to the Collector of Varanasi and it was a part of the contract that the plaintiff could be employed by the Government at any place within the State of Uttar Pradesh, and consequently, the place of performance of the contract was at Varanasi also.

(3.)ON the first point it was contended by the learned Standing Counsel that the general rule that a debtor must seek his creditor cannot be made applicable to Government and hence the suit could not be instituted at the place of residence of the plaintiff. The Courts of law can make a departure from the general rule only in a case where there was an agreement, oral or in writing, that the security money shall be refunded at a particular place; but if there was no contract as to the place of payment, the general rule can be made applicable, namely, that the amount would be refundable to the creditor at the place of his residence. The security money is, under certain circumstances, refundable to the person who furnished the security and when there exists a dispute and the security amount is not refunded, it becomes an amount payable and converts the parties into debtor and creditor. A similar view was taken in Champaklal Mohanlal v. Nectar Tea Co., AIR 1933 Bom 179.
At present there is nothing on the re-cord to show that under the contract, oral or in writing, or by implication, the security money was refundable at Lucknow or at a place other than Varanasi. Consequently, the suit for this amount could be taken cognizance of by the Courts at Varanasi it being a different thing that after the recording of evidence it may be found that the security money was not refundable at Varanasi, and this part of the claim could also not be taken cognizance of by the Varanasi Courts.

;


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