Back
2009 Supreme(Gau) 405
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GAUHATI (AGARTALA BENCH)
T. NANDAKUMAR SINGH, J.
The Secretary to the Govt. of Tripura, Dept. of Food and Civil Supplies and Ors. – Appellant
Vs.
Shri Babul Majumder – Respondent
Decided On : 10.06.2009
Headnote:
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 - Section 255 - Essential Commodities Act - Section 3 , 7(1)(a)(ii) and 15 - Cloth & Yarn Control Order. 1971 - Recovery of damages for malicious prosecution, for defamation, for closing business – Decreed – Claim for compensation - Plaintiff respondent filed suit being Money Suit No. before learned Civil Judge (Senior Division) for recovery of damages for malicious prosecution for defamation for closing business and shop of plaintiff-respondent maliciously, for destruction of stock and goods of business as well as damages for mental agonies valued against defendant-appellants - Later on, Money Suit No. was transferred to Additional District Judge - Plaintiff respondent pleaded in plaint that in year he started a clothes shop at No. 1 Tilla, Belonia after obtaining the valid licence from competent authority i.e. SDO (Food & Civil Supplies) and he had spent huge sum of money for getting his shop established and within a short span of time he gained dominance in Belonia Town which made him eye-sore of some political and business tycoons - From year plaintiff-respondent had to suffer much in hand of State Officials - Held, Appellate Court agreeing with view of trial Court need not restore effect of evidence or reiterate reasons given by the trial Court: expression of general agreement with reasons given by Court decision of which is under appeal, would ordinarily suffice - Court is in full agreement with the reasons given by trial Court in impugned judgment and order dated that there were not only absence of reasonable and probable cause but also malicious mind to prosecute plaintiff - For sake of repetition, this Court reiterate that no prudent person will think that there are reasonable and probable cause in prosecuting plaintiff-respondent by filing complaint to O/C Belonia police station in present given case inasmuch as said complaint case was a result of directions issued by SDO (Food and Civil Supplies) - Licence of plaintiff-respondent "wait for obvious reason" and there was no order for cancellation of said licence of plaintiff-respondent, when defendant-appellants took drastic step of seizing all stock of plaintiff-respondents shop and put same to auction sale and also that defendant-appellant No. 4 had clearly stayed in Court that during his tenure of service he did not institute any other case except the case of the plaintiff-respondent for not having licence whereas licence was presented to Office for renewal - Appeal dismissed
T. Nandakumar Singh, J.
1. This appeal has been directed against the judgment and decree dated 3-10-2000 passed by the learned Additional District Judge, Belonia, South Tripura, in Money Suit No. 1 of 1999, partly decreeing the suit in favour of the plaintiff-respondent inasmuch as the plaintiff-respondent is entitled to get compensation of Rs. 2,90,000/- from the defendant-appellants and the defendant-appellants are jointly and severally liable to make payment of the same to the plaintiff-respondent within thirty days from the date of passing the judgment and decree i.e. 3-1-2000.
2. Heard Mr. S. Deb, learned Senior Advocate, assisted by Mr. G. S. Bhattacharjee, learned Advocate appearing for the defendant appellants as well as Mr. K. N. Bhattacharjee, learned Senior Advocate, assisted by Mr. R. Debnath, learned Advocate for the plaintiff respondent.
3. For deciding the present appeal, a short fact leading to the filing of RFA No. 11 of 2000 (Re. RFA No. 8 of 2008), is recapitulated below:
The plaintiff respondent filed the suit being Money Suit No. 40 of 1996 before the learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), Udaipur, South Tripura for recovery of damages for malicious prosecution, for defamation, for closing the business and shop of the plaintiff-respondent maliciously, for destruction of stock and goods of business as well as damages for mental agonies valued at Rs. 5,00,000/- against the defendant-appellants. Later on, the Money Suit No. 40 of 1996 was transferred to the Additional District Judge, Belonia, South Tripura by an order of the District Judge, Udaipur dated 28-1-1999 and re-registered as Money Suit No. 1 of 1999.
4. The plaintiff respondent pleaded in the plaint that in the year 1990 he started a clothes shop at No. 1 Tilla, Belonia, South Tripura after obtaining the valid licence from the competent authority i.e. the SDO (Food & Civil Supplies), Belonia, South Tripura and he had spent huge sum of money for getting his shop established and within a short span of time he gained dominance in Belonia Town which made him eye-sore of some political and business tycoons. From the year 1993 the plaintiff-respondent had to suffer much in the hand of the State Officials. Admittedly, the licence of the plaintiff respondent for running his shop was valid up to 31-3-1993 and during the validity period of his licence, he submitted his licence for renewing or/revalidating to the SDO (Food & Civil Supplies), Belonia, South Tripura and also that the SDO (Food & Civil Supplies), Belonia, South Tripura was admittedly the concerned authority for renewing or/revalidating the licence of the plaintiff-respondent. The plaintiff-respondent had also deposited necessary fees in the form of challan for renewing his licence to the concerned authority i.e. the SDO (Food & Civil Supplies), Belonia, South Tripura. In spite of fulfilling all the requirements for renewing the said licence of the plaintiff-respondent, the SDO (Food & Civil Supplies), Belonia, South Tripura for the reasons best known to him did not revalidate the plaintiff-respondent's licence and simply kept it pending by writing note "wait for obvious reason" on the said licence of the plaintiff-respondent. It is the clear pleaded case of the plaintiff-respondent in the plaint of the Money Suit No. 1 of 1999 that the SDO (Food & Civil Supplies), Belonia, South Tripura, had the clear and definite knowledge that the plaintiff-respondent's licence had been made pending for revalidation by him by making the said note "wait for obvious reason" and also that he did not cancel the said licence of the plaintiff-respondent at the time he ordered his sub-ordinate officer to enquire the shop of the plaintiff-respondent for the reasons known to him.
5. As ordered by the SDO (Food & Civil Supplies), Belonia, South Tripura the defendant-appellant No. 5 Pradip Bhowmik, Inspector of Food & Civil Supplies, attached to the SDO (Food & Civil Supplies), Belonia, South Tripura along with one Shri
