PERINGOTTUKARA FINANCE AND INVESTMENTS CO LTD Vs. HARIKUMAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The unsuccessful plaintiff/appellant who suffered concurrent decrees passed by the courts below is the revision petitioner. The parties herein are referred to as the plaintiff and defendants as in the suit.

(2.) According to the plaintiff, the 1st defendant and defendants 2 and 3 as guarantors availed a business loan of Rs. 10,000/- from the branch of the plaintiff company and executed a Promissory note agreeing to repay the amount with interest at the rate of 21 % per annum with quarterly rests. Out of the three defendants, defendants 2 and 3 remained exparte. The 1st defendant who contested the suit interalia contended that no loan was sanctioned to him as alleged in the plaint, that in fact the 1st defendant had some earlier financial transactions with the plaintiff company for which the 2nd and 3rd defendants stood as guarantors. It is also contended that for the said purpose defendants were asked to affix their signatures on unfilled printed form of a promissory note wherein two revenue stamps were affixed. The 1st defendant also issued a signed blank cheque and another blank stamp paper for the said transaction. The agreed rate of interest for the said transaction was 16% simple interest per annum.

(3.) Before the trial court, PWs 1 and 2 were examined and Exts. A1 to A4 were produced. On the defendants side DW1 was examined and Exts. B1 and B2 were produced and marked. Exts. B1 and B2 are receipts issued by the plaintiff for repayment of Rs. 7,000/- and Rs. 613/- respectively.