Inder Dev Dua, J. - (1.) This regular second appeal is directed against the judgment and decree of the learned District Judge, Ludhiana, accepting the plaintiff's appeal against the judgment and decree of the Senior Subordinate Judge dated 18-1-1952 whereby he had been granted a decree for the recovery of Rs. 1,775-1-3. The learned District Judge enhanced the decretal amount to Rs. 2,324/2/- and also awarded interest at the rate of 6 per cent per annum on the decretal amount from 12-1-1948 till realization.
(2.) The plaintiff-firm, Joint Hindu Family Ajaib Singh Harbans Singh, used to carry on their business at Gujar Khan in District Rawalpindi before the partition of the country. In February, 1947, by means of several hundis beginning from 3-2-1947, he paid a sum of Rs. 7,000/- to Firm Gauri Lal Gurdev Dass, Commission Agents, Khanna Mandi, District Ludhiana, as margin money for purchases of some bales of cotton. It is alleged that the plaintiff purchased 200 blase through the defendant-firm. The plaintiff received back a sum of Rs. 2,100/- only and the defendant has neither returned the balance nor rendered any account of the transactions of the purchases and sales referred to above. Expecting to find at least a sum of Rs. 4,900/- due to him on taking accounts, the plaintiff instituted the present suit for the recovery of Rs. 4,900/- plus any other sums which may be found due after taking the accounts. The defendant admitted that the plaintiff-firm had entered into contract of purchase and sale of cotton and that in pursuance of this contract the plaintiff actually purchased and sold the said number of bales through him. Receipt of Rs. 7,000/- as advance money from the plaintiff-firm was also admitted but it was pleaded that by these transactions the plaintiff-firm had suffered a loss of Rs. 4,770/-. After adjusting the return of Rs. 2,1000/- the defendant averred that only a sum of Rs. 130/- remained due to the plaintiff which the defendant was ready and willing to pay back.
(3.) On 18-6-1949, the parties made a statement before the trial Court that a preliminary decree for accounts be passed and that a local Commissioner be appointed to go through the accounts and report as to how much amount, if any, was due to the plaintiff. In accordance with this statement, a preliminary decree for rendition of accounts was passed in favour of the plaintiff against the defendant and Pt. Des Raj, Advocate, was appointed a local Commissioner to go through the accounts and submit his report. Pt. Des. Raj, however, died before he could submit his report, with the result that on 28-3-1951 Shri B. S. Thapar was appointed a local Commissioner in place of Pt. Des Raj. Mr. Thapar submitted his report on 23-5-1951, according to which Rs. 4,810/8/6 were held due from the defendant to the plaintiff Objections were invited from both the parties,, but it was the defendant alone who objected to the report on the following main grounds: The local commissioner was wrong in holding that the plaintiff purchased only 100 bales for ready delivery and the remaining 100 bales were purchased by him for forward delivery. This finding of the local Commissioner was objected to on the ground that it was contrary to the plaintiff's own allegations in the plaint and to the finding of the Court. The local Commissioner was wrong in disallowing the sum of Rs. 103/4/- charged by the defendant for incidental expenses and Rs. 851/4/- charged by the defendant for payment of insurance premium.;