SUMAN TIWARI Vs. SATISH KUMAR BANSAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Regular First Appeal under Section 96 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC) is filed by the defendant in the suit impugning the judgment of the trial court dated 10.3.2017 decreeing the suit filed by the respondent/plaintiff for a sum of Rs.8,70,000/- along with interest at 8% per annum.

(2.) The subject suit was filed by the respondent/plaintiff pleading that he had given on 28.5.2012 a loan of Rs.1 lac to the appellants/defendants against receipt. It is further pleaded on 25.9.2012, 1.10.2012, 10.1.2013 and 17.2.2013 at the request of the appellants/defendants once again the respondent/plaintiff gave loans of Rs.70,000/-, Rs.3,00,000/-, Rs.2,50,000/- and Rs.1,50,000/- against receipts. Total loan amount is said to be Rs. 8,70,000/-. Since the appellants/defendants failed to pay the loan amount a legal notice dated 25.3.2014 was sent through registered AD, which inspite of service since failed to yield the desired result, the subject suit was hence filed.

(3.) Appellants/defendants in the written statement pleaded that they never received any loan of Rs.8,70,000/- from the respondent/plaintiff, but they had only taken a loan of Rs.1 lac from the respondent/plaintiff on 28.5.2012. It was pleaded that the respondent/plaintiff at the time of obtaining of loan obtained signatures of the appellants/defendants on blank papers. It is further pleaded that appellants/defendants had already repaid the loan taken of Rs.1 lac and at the time of return of the loan respondent/plaintiff stated that receipts were lost and hence they could not be returned. The suit was accordingly prayed to be dismissed. It was also pleaded that appellant no.2/defendant no.2 was only an auto rickshaw driver, and therefore, there was no reason why such a huge amount of Rs.8,70,000/- would have been taken by the appellants/defendants from the respondent/plaintiff.