T CHOWDAIAH Vs. KENCHAPPA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a plaintiff's second appeal against the divergent findings of the Courts below. The plaintiff-appellant succeeded in the trial court in obtaining a money decree against the defendant respondent. On appeal by the defendant, the lower appellate Court reversed the finding and dismissed the suit. The parties to this appeal will be referred to by the rank and position that were assigned to them in the trial Court.

(2.) The plaintiff filed the suit for recovery of a sum of Rs.2,085 which included interest on the principal amount advanced in the sum of Rs. 1,800 against the suit pronote Ex. P. 1 supported by Ex. P. 2 the consideration receipt. In the plaint the plaintiff averred that he had advanced the money to the defendant against the said pronote dated 7-2-1966 as the same was required by the defendant for his business reasons ; that the defendant paid only Rs. 100 on 5-3-1966; that in spite of repeated demands the defendant did not pay the balance of principal or interest thereon. After giving deduction to Rs. 100 paid on 5-3-1966 he worked out the principal and interest and claimed Rs. 2,085 in all.

(3.) The suit was resisted by the defendant on the ground that the pronote was executed for collateral security in connection with the prize amount he recived in respect of one of the two chits to which he was subscribing in the plaintiff's private chit fund transactions, The said chit fund transaction used to take place on 5th and 10th of each month ; that the chit value in both the chits was Rs. 2,000 consisting of 20 subscribers in each of the chits ; that he had purchased two of the chits, one auctioned on the 5th and the other on the 10th ; that he had fully paid up the first chit and he withheld some instalments, to be precise five of them, in respect of the 2nd chit as the plaintiff did not return the promissory note with reference to the first chit which had been fully paid up. In those circumstances, he admitted five instalments as due in respect of the second chit and that he was not liable to pay anything else.