Rajendra Nath Mittal, J. - (1.) THIS is a first appeal against the judgment and decree of the Subordinate Judge 1st Class, Chandigarh, dated 29th November, 1973, by which the suit of the Plaintiff was dismissed.
(2.) BRIEFLY , the facts are that Defendant No. 1 was working as Associate Professor of Opthalmology with the Plaintiff. He applied for four months' leave for going abroad in July, 1969, which was given to him on execution of a bond that he would serve the Institute for a period of four years after expiry of the leave or pay a sum of Rs. 45,000 to the Institute. Consequently, he, along with Defendants Nos. 2 and 3 as sureties, executed a bond dated 5th July, 1969, in favour of the Plaintiff. It is averred that Defendant No. 1 did not resume his duty on expiry of the leave. Hence the suit for recovery of Rs. 45,000 by the Institute. The Defendants contested the suit and inter alia pleaded that the suit had not been filed by a duly authorised person, that the Plaintiff could not legally get a bond from the Defendants and that the Plaintiff did not suffer any loss on account of not resuming the duty by Defendant No. 1 after expiry of the leave. They took some other pleas, those do not survive in the appeal. Before me issue Nos. 1, 3, 11 and 13, which are as follows, have been contested by the parties: 1. Whether the suit has been filed by a duly authorised person ? OPP. * * * * 3. Whether the Plaintiff could legally get the bond executed from the Defendants and whether it is permitted by law and service conditions of Defendant No. 1 and if not, what is its effect? OPP. * * * * 11. Whether any loss has been caused to the Plaintiff by Defendant No. 1 not resuming his duty after the expiry of the leave and if so, its quantum ? OPP. * * * * 13. Whether the Plaintiff is entitled to recover any amount from the Defendants and if so, from which of them ? OPP.
(3.) THE trial Court decided issues Nos. 1 and 3 in favour of the Plaintiff and issues Nos. 11 and 13 against it. In view of the findings on issues Nos. 11 and 13, it dismissed the suit. The Plaintiff has come up in appeal to this Court.;