P.PURUSHOTHAMAN NAIR Vs. SREEKANTAN NAIR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The plaintiff in a suit for money is the appellant. The suit was dismissed by the Trial Court and the appeal filed by him met with the same fate.

(2.) According to the appellant, the respondent borrowed Rs.1,50,000/- on 20/08/2001, for which he issued Ext. A1 cheque dated 15/12/2001, which on presentment was dishonoured due to insufficiency of funds, whereupon a notice was sent intimating the factum of dishonour. It was acknowledged by the respondent but no reply was sent. Hence the suit was filed.

(3.) The defendant refuted the allegations and contended that he had not borrowed Rs.1,50,000/- on 20/08/2001 nor did he issue Ext. A1 cheque. The contention that the said amount was borrowed by him for construction of his house was also denied. It was stated by him that a sum of Rs.75,000/- was borrowed by him from the appellant during December, 1997 and then a signed blank cheque leaf was handed over by him to the appellant. It was further contended that out of the sum of Rs.75,000/-, Rs.25,000/- and interest thereon was re-paid but the cheque was not returned. It was also stated that a reply was sent to the notice of dishonour received by him.