Law: Evidence Act, (1 of 1872)

Section: S. 114 (g)

Law: Contract, Act, 1872

Section: Ss. 161 & 176

Evidence Act (1 of 1872), S. 114 (g)-Plaintiff failing to produce document in hispossession embodying terms of contract--- Version of defendant accepted---Plaintiff's request to produce document at appellate stage-Disallowed.   Contract Act (IX of 1872), Ss. 161 & 176-Pawner and pawnee-Legal incidents ofrelationship-S. 161 attracted only if bailor calls upon bailee for return, delivery or tender of goods at specified time volunteering to discharge liability and bailee fails to comply with directive - Pawner making default in payment of debt-Pawnee under S. 176 not obliged to sell goods pledged.   Chitty on Contracts, paras. 130, 134 & 136 ; Restatement of Law of Security by American Law Institute, Art. 8 and I L R 21 Mad. 172 & 177 ref.   Partnership-Liability of partner for acts unauthorised or known to be so-PartnershipAct (IX of 1932), Ss. 9, 11, 12, 19, 22, 25 & 26. [p. 29] D et seq.   Partnership Act (IX of 1932), S. 26 and Contract act (IX of 1872), S. 176 - Pledge -Goods pledged by firm with third party merely as collateral security for discharge of liability-Property in goods pledged continues to be that of firm ---Sale of goods by pawnee on default of payment of debt ---Loss sustained in sale due to wrongful act of a partner-Loss that of partnership and not of pledge-Provisions of S. 26, Partner ship Act, 1932 not applicable.   Lindley on Partnership, p. 235 ref.   Trustee of the Property of Ellis & Company v. Dixon-Jhonson L R 1925 A C 489 and Official Assignee v. M. C. Harikrishana A I R 1935 Rang. 201 distinguished.   Contract Act (IX of 1872), Ss. 161 & 176-Sale of goods by pawnee with authorityof pawner-Question of pawnee's failure to produce or tender goods or of notice before sale, irrelevant.      JUDGMENT   BASHIR AHMAD, J.---The Bahawalnagar Co-operative Commis sion Shop Limited (hereinafter described as the plaintiff) brought a suit for recovery of Rs. 25,405-13-6 against the Firm Bahawalpur Cotton Company, Bahawalnagar (hereinafter described as the defendant), which had four partners; Sheikh Abdur Rahman, Sheikh Aziz-ur-Rahman, Muhammad Ali and Rehmat…