HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL FIRST APPEAL NO. 359 OF 2001 Old No. 464/1998 Kesar Singh …………Plaintiff/Appellant. Versus Executive Engineer and others. …..Defendant/Respondents. Dated: 9.4.2008 Hon’ble Rajesh Tandon, J. Heard Sri N.S. Negi, counsel for the appellant and Sri R.C.Arya, counsel for the respondents. 2. By the present First Appeal filed under Section 96 of the Code of Civil Procedure, appellant has prayed for setting aside the judgment and decree dated 19.5.1998 passed by the District Judge, Chamoli in Original Suit No. 52 of 1995 Kesar Singh Vs. Executive Engineer and others. 3. Briefly stated, a suit was filed by the plaintiff/ appellant being Original Suit No. 52 of 1995 Kesar Singh Vs. Executive Engineer and others for recovery of Rs. 1,00,145/- from the defendants. 4. According to the plaint averments, the plaintiff is a contractor and takes petty work orders and also does labour work, Defendants no. 2 and 3 were Junior Engineer and Assistant Engineer in the Public Works Department in the year, 1990. In the year, 1990, the defendant no. 2 gave an oral contract to the plaintiff stating that on Simli Karanprayag Road, there is necessity of thick and minute grit of 10mm and 12mm and ordered him to supply 40 trucks of concrete after breaking the concrete on Simli Chulakot Motor Marg and assured him that his payment will be done according to the departmental rate (Rs. 2,000/- per truck). Paragraphs 5, 6, 7 and 8 of the plaint are quoted below: “5- fd izfroknh ua&2 foHkkxh; voj vfHk;Urk gksus ds dkj.k oknh us mldh ckrksa ij fo”okl dj Lo;a o etnwj yxkdj tuojh 1991 ls fxzV rksM+uh vkjEHk dj nhA ftldh fd ns[k js[k o fujh{k.k izfroknh ua0 3 }kjk cjkcj ekSds ij vkdj Hkh tkrh jghA vkSj og oknh dks funsZf”kr djrk jgk mlds igys ospqjke lgk;d vfHk;Urk mDr dk;Z dh ns[k js[k djrs Fks muds LFkku ij izfroknh ua &3 lkeUr vk;sA 6& fd izfroknh ds }kjk vius Vªd la 6448 ds }kjk fofHkUu Mªkbojksa }kjk 2@4@91 ls 29@5@91 rd 20 Vªd dadjhV lM+d ij fcNk;s tkus gsrq mBkbZ xbZ ftldk vUnkt oknh us viuh fdrkc esa fd;k gSA o dqN dqN le; ij Mªkboj }kjk vius gLrk{kj Hkh djk;s x;s gSA 7& fd oknh us iqu% dadjhV rksM+uh vkjEHk dj nh vkSj ekpZ 1992 esa iwjs 40 Vªd dadjhV ekSds ij rksM+dj izfroknh la0 2 o 3 ds lqiqnZ fd;k vkSj vius Hkqxrku ds fy, izfroknhx.k ls fuosnu fd;k rks izfroknhx.k }kjk oknh dks vk”oklu fny;k x;k fd oknh dk Hkqxrku “kh?kz gh fd;k tk;sxkk bl chp izfroknh ua&2 }kjk le; le; ij dqy 5855 :i;ksa dk Hkqxrku oknh dks fd;k x;kA 8& fd vizSYk 1992 esa oknh ls izfroknhx.k dks vius }kjk rksM+h xbZ 40 Vªd fxzV ds Hkqxrku ds fy, dgk rks mUgksaus oknh dks ekj ihV o cUn djus dh /kedh nh o dgus yxs fd rqEgkjs uke ij dksbZ Hkh dk;kZns”k ;k Bsdk ugha gS rqEgs dksbZ :i;k ugha feysxk rqEgsa tks dqN djuk gks djsaA” 5. The defendants no. 1 and 4 have contested the contents mentioned in the plaint by filing a written statement, where it has been denied that any work order has been given to the plaintiff / appellant. It has further been stated that regarding the grit, the contract had been given on 28.2.1990 to Sri Mor Singh, on 26.9.1990 to Sri Dayal Singh and on 25.2.1990 to Sri Mor Singh and they had supplied the grit by Truck No. U.T.S. 6648. It has further been stated that the plaintiff had never been paid a sum of Rs. 5855/- by the department. 6. The defendant no. 3 has filed the written statement, wherein the contents made in the written statement of defendants no. 1 and 2 have been supported and it has been stated that he has been superannuated and just to harass him, the suit has been filed. 7. The defendant no. 2 has not filed any written statement, though, he has been examined as D.W.1. 8. On the pleadings of the parties, the trial Court has recorded a finding to the following effect: “1. D;k oknh ds izfroknhx.k ds fo:} vizSy 1992 bZloh rd 40 Vªd fxzV ds vadu 74] 145&00 :i;s vo”ks’k Fks\ rFkk okn izLrqr djus dh frfFk rd 12 izfr”kr C;kt nj izfro’kZ ds fglkc ls dqy 1]00]145&00 :i;s “ks’k jgs\ 2- D;k izfroknhx.k }kjk oknh ls dksbZ dk;Z ugh djok;k x;k\ rFkk fookfnr dk;Z vU; Bsdsnkjksa }kjk djok;k x;k tSlk fd izfrokn i= ds iSjk & 6 esa vafdr fd;k x;k gS\ 3- vuqrks’k vFkok /kujkf”k ;fn dksbZ gks ftldks fd oknh izkIr djus dk vf/kdkjh gS\ 9. While deciding the issue no. 1 and 2 as to whether a sum of Rs. 74,145/- for forty trucks grit of the plaintiff is due against the defendants from April, 1992 and upto the filing of the suit at the rate of 12% interest, a sum of Rs. 1,00,145/- is due and as to whether no work has been taken from the plaintiff by the defendants and the work in question had been got performed by some other Contractors as has been stated in paragraph 6 of the written statement, the trial Court has recorded a finding that no work order was given to the plaintiff. Relevant portion of the finding recorded by the trial Court is quoted below: 11 oknh }kjk izLrqr lk{; dks ;fn fo”oluh; eku Hkh fy;k tk; rc Hkh mls dsoy bruk gh izekf.kr gksrk gS fd oknh }kjk rS;kj dh xbZ fxzV dk ifjogu izfroknh ds Vªd MªkbZoj dh txeksgu flag ok0lk0la0 2 }kjk vius Vªd ls gh ch0,u0 pkS/kjh ds funsZ”k ij fd;k x;k Fkk Jh ch0,u0 pkS/kjh dks u rks bl dsl esa i{kdkj cuk;k x;k gS vkSj uk mUgsa lk{kh ds :i esa oknh }kjk izLrqr fd;k x;k gS ;g lkfcr gksus ij fd mDr Vªd ls fxzV dh vkiwfrZ Jh ch0,u0 pkS/kjh ds ekSf[kd funsZ”k ij dh x;h FkhA muds fo:} O;fDrx.k vkSj vkKfIr fxzV dh dher ds lEcU/k esa ikfjr dh tk ldrh Fkh ;fn mUgsa bl dsl esa i{kdkj cuk;k x;k gksrkA fdUrq mUgsa bl dsl esa i{kdkj ugha cuk;k x;k vkSj ,slh fLFkfr esa esjs fopkj esa oknh orZeku izfroknhx.k ls dksbZ vuqrks’k ikus dk vf/kdkjh ugha gSA 10. While deciding the issue no. 3 with regard to relief, the trial Court has recorded a finding that the plaintiff is not entitled to get any relief and has dismissed the suit of the plaintiff on 189.5.1998. 11. I have gone through the evidence available on record and the judgment and decree passed by the court below. I do not find any infirmity or illegality with the finding recorded by the court below so as to interfere under Section 96 of the Code of Civil Procedure. 12. Consequently, First Appeal lacks merit and is dismissed. No order as to costs. (Rajesh Tandon, J.) 9.4.2008 Rathour