UMESH CHANDRA & COMPANY Vs. LAVANYA PATEL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is preferred under Sec. 96 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 against the judgment/decree dtd. 31/3/2005 passed by 5th Additional District Judge, Raipur (CG) in Civil Suit No. 46-B/2003 wherein the said court decreed the suit filed by the respondent/plaintiff for recovery of money to the tune of Rs.1,50,000.00 with interest of Rs.50,000.00 and cost of the suit.

(2.) As per case of respondent/plaintiff, appellant/defendant borrowed money on different dates from the respondent/plaintiff totalling to Rs.1,50,000.00 which was to be returned within three months and interest was 2.5% per month. Appellant/defendant paid interest on various and at last he paid interest on 4/8/1999, thereafter he stopped paying the interest of the amount, therefore, respondent/plaintiff issued a legal notice to him on 30/5/2002 for repayment of the amount and when no amount has been paid she filed a civil suit for recovery of the amount which is decreed by the trial Court.

(3.) Learned counsel for the appellant would submit that PW/2 Prajay Gwalre who deposed before the trial Court on behalf of respondent/plaintiff is not competent to give evidence on her behalf, therefore, decree on the basis of his statement is not sustainable. He would further submit that the respondent/plaintiff is not registered under Money Lenders Act, therefore, she is not entitled to file civil suit against the appellant. He would further submit that finding of the trial court is not based on proper marshaling of the evidence, therefore, same is liable to be set aside.