P.LAKSHMANAN Vs. MUNIAPPAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Defendant in the original Suit is the Appellant in the Second Appeal. Muniappan, the Respondent herein/Plaintiff filed the Suit O.S. No. 69/2003 on the file of the Sub-Court, Sankari for the recovery of a sum of Rs. 1,45,000/- together with an interest thereon at the rate of 18% per annum from the date of Plaint till date of realisation based on an unregistered usufructuary Mortgage Deed dated 19.6.1998. The Suit was decreed by the Trial Court directing the Appellant herein/Defendant to pay the said amount claimed in the Plaint to the Plaintiff along with an interest at the rate of 9% per annum from the date of Plaint till realisation as against the claim of interest @ 18% per annum. The Appellant herein/Defendant was also directed by the Trial Court to pay the cost of litigation to the Respondent herein/Plaintiff. Challenging the said decree dated 19.12.2005 passed by the Trial Court in O.S. No. 69 of 2003, an Appeal was filed by the Appellant herein/Defendant in A.S. No. 16 of 2006 on the file of the Court of the Principal District Judge, Salem. The learned Principal District Judge, Salem dismissed the Appeal without cost by his judgment and decree dated 5.7.2006 confirming the decree passed by the Trial Court. The said judgment and decree of the Lower Appellate Court are challenged in the present Second Appeal. The Suit was filed by the Respondent herein/Plaintiff on the basis of the Plaint averments, which are in brief, as follows:

(2.) The Appellant herein/Defendant resisted the Suit by filing a Written Statement, which contains the following averments, besides general denial of the Plaint averments:

(3.) Based on the above said averments, the Trial Court framed the following issues and additional issues: