H S SRINIVASA Vs. GIRIJAMMA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner is the plaintiff. He questions the order dated 29.08.2001 passed by the learned trial Judge on I.A. XI in O.S.No.213/96, a copy of which is produced at Annexure-B.

(2.) During the course of this order, the parties Would be referred to as per their rankings in the trial Court.

(3.) The matter arises in the following manner. One Janthakal Rachappa, the husband of defendant-1 and father of defendants 2 to 4 and one H.B. Padmanabha had approached the plaintiff-petitioner for the purpose of constructing and starting a business of bakery. An agreement was executed by late Janthakal Rachappa and H.B. Padmanabha in favour of the plaintiff on 29.9.1993. Under the said agreement late Rachappa had agreed to let out the building proposed to be constructed on a monthly rent of Rs.7001/- On the same day, late Rachappa had received an advance amount of Rs.51,000/- by cash. It is the case of the plaintiff that late Sri Rachappa borrowed a sum of Rs. one lakh each on two separate occasions from him and he has signed and delivered two promissory notes to the plaintiff. In one promissory note the name of the promisor and promisee was left blank and the interest column also was left blank. But however the amount borrowed i.e., Rs. one lakh was mentioned in words. The said promissory note was also signed by late Rachappaon two revenue stamps. In Another pronote also-the name of the promissor and promisee are left blank and the amount borrowed was mentioned as Rs. one lakh, which is written in words. Interest has also been mentioned at 2% per month per Rs.100/- The said pronote is also signed by late Rachappa on two revenue stamps.