( 1 ) THOUGH these appeals are three in number and the suits out of which they arose are also three in number, the sould and crux of this diversity in numbers are one and the same. Only the plaintiffs-appellants and the amounts of their claims differ from case to case. But both the defendants respondents and the nature of the dispute are identical. Logically, therefore, same arguments have been addressed in the Court below as well as before us, and the trial Court rendered a single judgment in all of them. We propose to do the same.

( 2 ) SINCE the facts in the three appeals are identical, it would be adequate if we state the fads in A-S. 651/74 which arises out of O. S. I 34/69 wherein the plaintiff has claimed the largest amount of the three matters. Suffice it to mention that A S. Nos. 326 and 510 of 1975 arise out of O. S. No. 135 and 136 of 1969 respectively. The plaintiffs-appellants in the first two regular appeals are firms, while the appellant in the last is a single individual. The 1st dcfeadant 1st respondent in all the matters is also a firm. The 2nd respondent is described as an individual. The plaintiff firm filed O. S. 134/69 (it is out of this suit