TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1987 (2) TMI 530
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t was filed in the year, 1971. 3 . Defendant-appellant-State resisted the suit and prayed for its dismissal. Trial Court dismissed the same, while the lower appellate Court decreed the suit declaring the plaintiff-respondent to be entitled to the salary, as claimed by him. 4. This appeal was admitted on the following substantial question of law : "Whether, considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned lower appellate Court has correctly decided the case in accordance with law?" 5 . Two points have been raised by Shri Jain, learned Dy. Government Advocate, appearing for the appellant State, firstly, that the lower appellate Court erred in permitting additional evidence at the appellate stage, and secondly, t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the nature of the documents and the reasons assigned by the Court below. 7 . The other point, which the learned Dy. Government Advocate for the appellant State has raised is about pleadings. It is a settled law that denial of any fact averred by the plaintiff must be specific. In absence of any specific denial, the inference as has been drawn by the lower appellate Court, cannot be assailed on any legitimate grounds. It is not disputed that the rule of 'traverse' permits such an inference. In these circumstances this ground, which is raised by the learned counsel is of no avail to the appellant State. 8. The other ground, which remains to be considered is regarding non-production of documents by the appellant State and an adverse....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... type are legion. It must be remembered that the State is no ordinary party trying to win a case against one of its own citizens by hook or by crook; for the State's interest is to meet honest claims, vindicate a substantial defence and never to score a technical point or overreach a weaker party to avoid a just liability or secure an unfair advantage, simply because legal devices provide such an opportunity. The State is a virtuous litigant and looks with unconcern on immoral forensic successes so that if on the merits the case is weak, government shows a willingness to settle the dispute regardless of prestige and other lesser motivations which move private parties to fight in Court." It is really painful to note that the Co....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e logic behind such a plea of 'privileged' documents 'being raised a myth long exploded, but unfortunately very conveniently adhered to by the State, The Supreme Court in S.P. Gupta v. Union of India AIR 1982 SC 149 has in no uncertain terms denounced such a plea being raised. If there was such a communication, as claimed by the plaintiff and not denied by the appellant State, the document must be in possession of the State. There is no reason or rhyme in claiming any privilege as regards such a document, which merely informs the Accountant General about the scale of pay, which was made payable to a trained Graduate teacher. Such a plea of 'privileged document' being raised in a thoughtless and reckless manner-deserves t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he plaintiff, in para 9 of his plaint, has made the necessary averment regarding limitation, which has also not been traversed by the appellant State. All that is said by the defendant State is "Sweekar Nahi" Without specifying as to why the facts stated in para 9. were being denied. A very incongruent plea is to be found in para 5 of the appellant-State's special pleadings. Before this Court it is being contended that the suit was barred by time, while before the trial Court the plea was (as contained in para 5 of the special pleadings), that the suit being premature was liable to be dismissed. It is unfortunate that such pleas are being raised. Even assuming that the suit was barred by time for some reason or other, yet this....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d, hardly commends the Officer-in-Charge or the Government Pleader, who either filed or approved of the filing of such a written-statement. Such an attitude deserves to be condemned. It is defeating the very object and purpose of Section 80, C.P.C. The Supreme Court in Raghunath Das v. Union of India, AIR 1969 SC 674 has observed : "The object of the notice contemplated by Section 80, Civil P.C. is to give to the concerned Governments and public officers opportunity to reconsider the legal position and to make amends or settle the claim, if so advised without litigation. The legislative intention behind that section is that public money and tune should not be wasted on unnecessary litigation and the Government and the public officers....