This first appeal challenged the trial court's judgment conceding a counter claim of Rs.68,663/-. The high court upheld the trial court's findings based on unimpeachable documents regarding the entrustment of an assignment, holding the appeal devoid of merit and dismissing it.
Assail on the counter claim was rejected and the appeal was dismissed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
1
In the High Court of Judicature for Rajasthan at Jaipur Bench Jaipur O R D E R
S.B. Civil First Appeal No.103 of 1995 Cox & Kings (India) Limited VERSUS M/s. Choices, 604, Adarsh Nagar, Jaipur
Date of Order ::: 05.02.2016
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Kanwaljit Singh Ahluwalia
Mr. R.P. Agrawal, Counsel for the plaintiff-appellant Mr. R.C. Sharma, Counsel for the defendant-respondent ***
Instant appeal has been preferred by the plaintiffappellants under Section 96 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 against the impugned judgment & decree dated 22.11.1994 rendered by Court of Additional District & Sessions Judge, No.7, Jaipur City, Jaipur.
The said Court, vide its impugned judgment dated 22.11.1994, decreed the plaintiff's suit for Rs.22,010/- and also decreed defendant's counter claim for Rs.68,663/-.
The present appeal has been preferred in order to assail the counter claim of Rs.68,663/- granted in favour of defendant-respondent.
Mr. R.P. Agarwal, learned counsel appearing for the plaintiff-appellant, has vehemently assailed the finding given by the trial Court on Issue No.5.
Issue No.5 reads as under :-
2
"5आया ्ऺ ितवादी फमर् ्षारा वादी क�पनी को एक्सपोटर् हेतु भेजा गया 31500/-�पये का एक्सपोटर् क�साईनमे�ट वादी क�पनी ने बेजा तरीके से अपने पास रोके रखा तथा एक्सपोटर् ने होने के ोमोशन कारण ्ऺ ितवादी फमर् को 3150/-�पये एमरे�ड एक्सपोटर् ्ऺ काउि�सल ्ष ारा ज�त िकये गये इस कारण ्ऺ ितवादी फमर् वादी क�पनी से 34650/-�पये ्ऺा� करने की अिधकारी है?"
The ld. trial Court, while appreciating the evidence of DW-3 - Neelam, Manager, Kargo Complex, documents A-1 to A- 26 and vouchers A/33 & A/34 came to a conclusion that S.K.
Kapoor, (DW-1), witness of the plaintiff has not denied execution of the said documents.
The ld. trial Court further held that the defendant by leading evidence has proved that assignment worth Rs.37,500/- was entrusted to the plaintiff-appellant.
It is a time tested adage that the witnesses may hide the truth, but the documents cannot.
In the present case, documents brought on record in a categoric terms, prove entrustment of the assignment to the plaintiff-appellant.
Counsel appearing for the plaintiff-appellant, inspite of the best efforts made, could not demolish the documents relied by the ld. Court below. Counsel appearing for the plaintiff-
appellant has failed to persuade this Court to record discordant note.
Hence, no interference is warranted and the present appeal, being devoid of merit is, hereby, dismissed.
[ Kanwaljit Singh Ahluwalia ] J.
3
ashok/Certificate - All corrections have been incorporated in the judgment/order being emailed. Ashok Kumar Songara/P.S.cum J.W.
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the trial court erred in rejecting the plaintiff-appellant's challenge to the evidence of documents regarding entrustment of assignment.
Whether the appeal against the counter claim stands to be allowed.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Cox & Kings (India) Limited
M/s. Choices
Kanwaljit Singh Ahluwalia
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
