- (1.) In order to appreciate the point involved in these proceedings, the facts of the case must be set out in some detail.
(2.) Messrs. Jawahar Singh-Tara Singh instituted Civil Suit No. 25 of 1950 on the 16th of January 1950, for the recovery of Rs. 2,360/- against Messrs. Parmanand-Ganesh Parshad, Grain and Seed Merchants of Mahranipur, District Jhansi (U.P.). In paragraph No. 11 of the plaint it is stated that the defendant- firm drew a hundi in the plaintiff-firm at Amritsar and realized the proceeds of that hundi at Amritsar. It is then stated that the defendant-firm was to supply the goods to the plaintiff-firm at Amritsar. On these facts it is claimed that the Civil Courts in Amritsar District have jurisdiction to try the suit. In the written statement the defendant-firm pleaded that the contract was made at Mahranipur, that the goods were to be delivered at Mahranipur, and that in performance of the contract money was to be paid at Mahranipur. Defendant firm than pleaded that the relationship between the plaintiff-firm and the defendant-firm was that of principal and agent. On these facts it is maintained that the Civil Courts at Amritsar have no jurisdiction to try the suit.
(3.) Sardar Tava Singh, proprietor of the plaintiff-firm, gave evidence for the plaintiff-firm at the trial, while. Shri Ram Nath, munib of the defendant-firm, gave evidence for the defendant-firm. In his evidence Sardar Tara Singh stated: "450 maunds of tilli (washed) was purchased by me from the defendant. The defendant was to supply the goods and I had to pay the money at Amritsar. In this purchase transaction, the defendant sent a hundi of Rs. 2,000/- through the Central Bank and I paid off the amount, but the goods were never sent by the defendant and I have sued therefore for the return of the money with interest. The actual goods were to be sent by the defendant through the Railway Receipt through the Bank. The hundi was also to be received through the Bank and paid through it." Sardar Tara Singh was cross-examined, but there is not a syllable in the cross- examination of Sardar Tava Singh showing that his statement, set out in the preceding paragraph, was incorrect.;