RAMASAMI MOOPAR Vs. RAMASWAMI MOOPANAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The first defendant is the appellant in this Appeal.

(2.) The plaintiff-1st respondent has filed a suit for recovery of a sum of Rs.31,650/-, based on a promissory note. The case of the plaintiff is that the plaintiff and defendants are relatives. On 27.07.1982, defendants-1 and 2 received a sum of Rs.25,000/- from the plaintiff and executed a promissory note, agreeing to repay it with 12% interest thereon. In spite of repeated demands, the amount was not repaid. The defendants are not entitled for any of the reliefs under the Debt Relief Act. Therefore, the plaintiff filed the suit for recovery of Rs.31,650/- with interest.

(3.) The defendants filed a written statement, stating that they never received Rs.25,000/- from the plaintiff. The promissory note is not real. They received only Rs.10,000/- and for the amount, they signed on a blank promissory note and that has been filled up by the plaintiff subsequently. In fact, for having received Rs.10,000/-, the plaintiff was put in possession of the defendants' agricultural land and by efflux of time and by application of Tamil Nadu Act-4/38 and 40/79, the usufructory mortgage also gets discharged and therefore, no amount was due and payable by the defendants.