Civil First Appeal dismissing challenge to trial court decree for recovery of service charges. Court found notice requirements met, joint issue decision valid, no need for additional parties, and 12% interest lawful against 18% defense claim.
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.
[2024:RJ-JD:540]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR
S.B. Civil First Appeal No. 117/1993
Ltd., through the Leader, Speaker Head Team, Chilling Centre, Pali. (Defendent No. 2).
----Appellant
Versus
M/s Agarwal Ice Factory, Falna, District Pali
----Respondent
For Appellant(s) : Mr. J. Gehlot For Respondent(s) : -
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MADAN GOPAL VYAS
Judgment
DATE OF JUDGMENT: 05/01/2024
The instant Civil First Appeal has been preferred by the appellants-defendants under Section 96 of the CPC against the judgment and decree dated 05.12.1992 passed by the District Judge, Pali (hereinafter referred to as the learned Trial court) in Civil Original Case No. 10/82, whereby the suit filed by the plaintiff-respondent was decreed with costs.
[2024:RJ-JD:540]
[CFA-117/1993]
(2 of 5)
business of chilling milk at Falna, District Pali. Vide a commercial agreement dated 13.12.1978, the appellant no. 2 entrusted the work of chilling milk to the respondent at a consideration of Rs. 0.05 paisa per litre per day. It was averred by the plaintiff that it started to execute the work of chilling milk from 12.12.1978 and carried out the said work up till 25.04.1979. The total consideration amount for the work came to Rs. 50,823.70. The defendant No. 2 paid Rs. 15,000/-(Rs. 5,000/- on 15.01.1979 and Rs. 10,000/- on 08.02.1979). Thus, the plaintiff filed a suit for recovery of Rs 50,100/- (out of which Rs.35,823.70 being the principal amount and Rs. 14,276.50 being the interest) before the learned Trial Court. The defendants claimed a set-off of Rs. 77,000/- from the plaintiff as the plaintiff had not chilled the milk as was required of him rather freezed it which had caused loss to the defendants.
[2024:RJ-JD:540]
[CFA-117/1993]
(3 of 5)
submitted that Issue Nos. 4 and 5 were decided by the learned Trial Court jointly even though the issues are not connected and thus, learned Trial Court has committed grave error in deciding the said issues together. In support of this contention, learned counsel has relied upon the judgment of Mohan Lal and Anr. v. Smt Rahisa Begum and Ors. reported in 2011(2) DNJ (Raj.) 732. It is also contended by learned counsel that M/s Rajasthan Co-Operative Dairy Federation Ltd., Jaipur, Jodhpur Unit, Jodhpur; Registrar, CoOperative Society, Jaipur and Collector, Pali were necessary parties in the suit, but were not impleaded as parties. Thus, the findings on Issue no. 9 without impleading necessary parties is erroneous. Lastly, it was contended that the imposition of 12% interest is excessive and as per CPC, the interest should have been 6% only. Thus, on the basis of aforesaid contentions, it was prayed by the learned counsel that the impugned order is illegal, perverse and contrary to law and thus is liable to be set aside.
“This may be treated as notice under section 143 of the Rajasthan Cooperative Societies Act read with sec. 80 C.P.C.”.
[2024:RJ-JD:540]
[CFA-117/1993]
(4 of 5)
8 . Further, the acknowledgment of the above notice is on record and is marked as Exhibit 60. Thus, the contention of learned counsel that no notice was served upon the Registrar, Rajasthan Co-Operative Societies has no force.
[2024:RJ-JD:540]
[CFA-117/1993]
(5 of 5)
after considering all the facts and circumstances of the case has rightly held that the plaintiff is entitled to 12% interest.
(MADAN GOPAL VYAS),J
3-CPG/-
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the trial court erred in not serving notice on the Registrar under Section 143 of the Rajasthan Co-Operative Societies Act.
Whether the trial court erred in deciding Issue Nos. 4 and 5 jointly and in decrying without impleading necessary parties.
Whether the interest rate awarded at 12% is excessive.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
2011(2) DNJ (Raj.) 732Distinguished¶23
2 provisions across 2 enactments
M/s. Paschimi Rajasthan Dugdh Utpadak Sahakari Sangh Ltd.
M/s Agarwal Ice Factory, Falna
Madan Gopal Vyas
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
