NEPAL SINGH Vs. OM PAL SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The respondent herein, as plaintiff, instituted a suit for recovery of an amount of Rs.54,450/- under Order XXXVII of the Code of Civil Procedure against the appellant/defendant herein, on the basis of a pronote-cum-receipt dated 6th May, 1982.

(2.) It was alleged in the plaint that the appellant/defendant being in need of money repeatedly requested the plaintiff in the month of April, 1982 to give a loan of Rs.40,000/-. It was alleged that the plaintiff agreed and gave a loan of Rs.40,000/- to the defendant on 6th May, 1982, who on receipt of the said loan from the plaintiff executed a promissory note-cum-receipt of the same date after receiving the said amount in cash with stipulation to re-pay the same on demand along with interest at the rate of 12% p.a. However, thereafter, the defendant failed to re-pay the amount despite several repeated oral demands and accordingly a registered notice dated 15th April, 1985 was sent by the plaintiff to the defendant demanding re-payment of the said amount. Despite receipt of the said notice the appellant/defendant did not pay back the amount and accordingly the suit was instituted for recovery of the aforesaid amount along with interest at the rate of 12% p.a. The suit was based on the promissory note-cum-receipt dated 6th May, 1982 under Order XXXVII of the Code of Civil Procedure .

(3.) The defendant entered appearance and filed an application seeking for leave to defend. The trial court after hearing the counsel appearing for the parties on the aforesaid application seeking for leave to defend, granted leave to defend the suit on defendant furnishing surety, which he had furnished. Thereafter, the defendant also filed the written statement wherein the defendant had alleged that the aforesaid promissory note-cum-receipt, on which the entire suit is based, is a forged document. It was categorically and totally denied by the defendant that he had ever borrowed a sum of Rs.40,000/- from the plaintiff. He also denied execution of any promissory note-cum-receipt dated 6th May, 1982. It was alleged that the aforesaid suit is filed by the plaintiff in collusion with his brother Netra Pal Singh, who is a marginal witness to the promissory note-cum-receipt dated 6th May, 1982.