Durga Prasad v. Swami Avidya Nand Guru Swami Hamarata Nand .

1. This is an appeal under section of the Court-fees Act.

2. The plaintiff brought a suit for recovery of price of stone ballast supplied to the defendant, defendant in the written statement alleged at the plaintiff failed to supply the stone ballasted, therefore, he suffered a loss of Rs. 13,459/3/-, therefore, claimed a set off. The court deed court-fee on this set-off.

3. The defendant rejected to it. After hearing the parties the Civil ??? has asked the defendant to pay ad valorem court fee on Rs. 13,459/-. Against that order this peal has been filed.

4. It had been contended that by claiming these ages the defendant was actually not claiming ??? set off but was pleading adjustment. I do not ??? that this is case of adjustment or payment that the present case is a case of set off on the ground damages suffered on account of non-supply of the he ballast. If the claim by the plaintiff had been ??? and the amount due from the defendant the plaintiff had been adjusted in this account, the ??? would have been different. But the cause ??? of the claim for damages being entirely ??? it is a clear case of set off covered by the ??? decision of this Court in Ratan Lal v. Madari, AIR 1950 All 237 (A).

5. Learned counsel for the appellant relied on ??? Electric Power Co., Ltd. v. Suraj Kishan, AIR 1937 Lah 62 (B). I do not think the facts of that are similar to the facts of the present one and my opinion the decision of the court below is ??? I see no force in this appeal; it is ??? dismissed. In the circumstances of the case aka no order as to costs.

6. The record of the case shall be sent back the court below forthwith so that the case may decided as expeditiously as possible.

G.P

7. Appeal dismissed.