PANICKER Vs. PRABHAKARAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) DEFENDANT in a Suit for money, is the Appellant.

(2.) THE defendant is the Director and Producer of Cinemas. He produced the cinema "prakrithi Manohari" and for taking additional prints, paying the technical experts and meeting the advertisement charges, he wanted a sum of Rs. 70,000/ -. THE plaintiff offered to pay that on certain conditions. THEy on 25-4-1980 entered into Ext. A3 Agreement, by which the sum of Rs. 70 ,000 /- was to be paid on or be fore 15-8-1980. THE amount so advanced was to carry interest at 12 per cent per annum. It is also provided that the plaintiff wilt be entitled to 15 per cent commission on the profits derived from exhibiting the cinema. Another condition in the agreement is that Rs. 50,000/- will be paid back as and when the defendant gets Government subsidy. Clause (13) of the agreement says that the sum is repayable with interest within one year and in case of default, the plaintiff will be entitled to recover that with interest.

(3.) THE trial court raised the necessary issues arising out of the pleadings aril on a consideration of the evidence, found that the plaintiff has paid the sum of Rs. 70 ,000 /- within the time provided in Ext. A3, that the repayment of that was only to the tune of rs. 50,000/- received by way of subsidy, that the balance due is Rs. 20,000/-, and that by way of commission from the profits the plaintiff is entitled to recover Rs. 15,000/ -. THE trial court further held that the limitation is saved by the subsequent agreements, evidenced by Exts. A 10 and A9 falling under S. 25 (3) of the Contract Act and so, there is no bar of limitation. A decree for recovery of Rs. 44 ,276 /- with interest was awarded. Aggrieved by. the decree, the defendant has curies up in Appeal.