Law:

Section:

JUDGMENT The facts giving rise to this second appeal from the appellate order dated 167.70 of the learned Additional District Judge, Peshawar are few and simple and are more or less admitted. In any case since the findings of fact by the two Courts below are binding on this Court in the second appeal I would accept them as correct. These are as tinder. The firm Messrs Sangeen Khan Abdul Jalil, which is respondent No. 1 herein,was the plaintiff in the suit. It consigned 208 bags of gur to Messrs Khuda-e-Noor and Mauladad who were together impleaded as defendant No. 2 but in the present appeal they have been arrayed as respondents Nos. 2 and 3. The railway receipt was entrusted by defendant No. 1 to Messrs Habib Bank Limited, the appellant which was defendant No. 1 in the suit. Defendant No. 1 was to collect the amount from defendant No. 2 and to pay the same to the plaintiff-firm. Defendant No. 1 sent the railway receipt to its branch at Quetta. However, since defendant No. 2 was running business at Noshki, a place away from Quetta, and there was no branch of Habib Bank there, the Habib Branch of Quetta entrusted the railway receipt to Quetta Central Urban Industrial Co-Operative Bank Limited, Noshki, which was defendant No. 3 in the suit and has been impleaded as respondent No. 4 in this appeal. Defendant No. 3 realized the amount from defendant No. 2 which took the delivery of the consignment. Defendant No. 3 prepared a draft for a sum of Rs. 4,403.68 drawn on Punjab Co-operative Bank Limited Karachi, defendant No. 4, which has been impleaded as respondent No. 5 in the present appeal. The amount of the draft was payable to defendant No. 1 and obviously the same was to be paid by that defendant to the plaintiffsfirm. However, it transpired that defendant No. 4 had ceased to exist. The amount of the draft, therefore, could not reach defendant No. 1 which failed to make the payment to the plaintiffs, which necessitated the filing of the suit for recovery of the amount from the four defendants. The learned trial Judge passed the decree against defendants Nos. 1 and 3 andfrom his judgment and decree, the appeal of defendant No. 1 was dismissed. Defendant No. I in…