- (1.) This Regular Second Appeal is directed against the judgment of District Judge, Karnal, who on appeal affirmed the judgment and decree of the trial Judge dismissing the suit of the appellant for recovery of some articles and in the alternative for recovery of Rs. 2,67,270.90.
(2.) THE FACTS: The appellant (hereinafter referred to as the plaintiff) came to the Court on the allegations that the plaintiff had appointed defendant No. 1 as commission agent for purchasing food grains for it vide letter dated October 27, 1969. The plaintiff placed gunny bags at the disposal of defendant No. 1 for filling food grains therein. The plaintiff also delivered two tarpaulins of the value of Rs. 1,000/- each to the defendant for protecting the food grains from rains. The defendant No. 1 did not account for the material supplied and made short supply of food grains by 441 quintals 52 kgs. 800 grams of the value of Rs. 34,517.20. The claim was split up as under:- JUDGEMENT_330_AIR(P&H)_1990Html1.htm
(3.) The contesting respondent-defendant (hereinafter referred to as the defendant) controverted the material allegations made in the plaint. It denied its appointment as an agent for purchasing food grains for the plaintiff. The act of the plaintiff appointing it as commission agent was unilateral. It denied having made short supply of food grains. The receipt of the Tarpaulins was admitted but these were of the value of Rs. 100/-. Some gunny bags were received but the plaintiff lifted 937 gunny bags from the godown of the defendant and the plaintiff failed to account for these bags in its account. The authority of the District Manager to file the suit was assailed. An additional plea was taken that the suit was beyond limitation.;