- (1.) THIS first appeal under Section 96 CPC is directed against judgment and decree dated 17.10.1987 passed by Additional District Judge No.2, Sriganganagar, whereby the suit filed by the plaintiff - respondent was decreed for a sum of Rs.13,999.40 P. and the counter claim preferred by the appellant for a sum of Rs.54,379.46 P. has been rejected.
(2.) THE facts in brief may be noticed thus: the plaintiff a partnership firm is a commission agent and is involved in supply of 'Mahua Flowers'. The parties appellant & respondent entered into an agreement dated 05.05.1972, whereby the plaintiff was required to supply 'Mahua Flowers' to the tune of 25000 quintals between the date of agreement and 15.06.1972. The supply under the Contract having come to an end, the plaintiff ­ respondent filed a suit for recovery of Rs.57,320.51 P. under various heads. A written statement was filed by the appellant ­ defendant disputing the claim; seeking set -of under various heads and a counter claim seeking recovery of penalty of Rs.54,379.46 P. based on the stipulation in the Contract.
(3.) AFTER framing issues, parties led evidence and after hearing, the trial court upheld the claim of the plaintiff to the extent of Rs.13,999.40 P. being a sum of Rs.7,999.29 P. towards cost of Flowers; Rs.1090.11 P. towards interest and Rs.5,000/ - towards security deposits; while arriving at the said sum set -of to the extent claimed by the appellant ­ defendant was allowed.;