K KUPPUSWAMI PILLAI Vs. K NATARAJAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE plaintiff-first-respondent's suit to recover a sum of Rs. 15,396/- with interest has been decreed by the trial court and affirmed by a learned single judge of this Court in appeal. THE first-defendant-judgment debtor has preferred this appeal on various grounds.

(2.) ACCORDING to the case of the plaintiff, the two defendants in the suit, who were related to him, borrowed on 20.9.1975, a sum of Rs. 10,000/- by way of hand loan for the purpose of their business carried on under the name and style of Raju Engineering Works in Pappanaickanpalayam. The defendants agreed to repay the same with interest thereon at 17 per cent per annum, but defaulted. They also borrowed another sum of Rs. 2,000/- from the plaintiff on 10.10.1975, for which the plaintiff reserved his right to take a separate suit. Defendants, however, denied the plaintiff's claim that they borrowed a sum of Rs. 10,000/- promising to repay the same wit interest thereon at 10 per cent per annum. ACCORDING to the defendants, the first-defendant borrowed only once from the plaintiff a sum of Rs. 10,000/- on 29.12.1971 under a promissory note and by deposit of title deeds in respect of his house property. Towards the said loan, the first-defendant paid a sum of Rs. 2,800 between 1971 and 1973. These payments were endorsed in the pocket note-book of the first-defendant. In 1974, a further sum of Rs. 1,000/- was paid and endorsed on the promissory-note In 1975, a cheque for Rs. 2,000/- was issued to the plaintiff by the second-defendant. But the plaintiff did not encash the same, nor returned the cheque. A sum of Rs. 2,000/- was paid in cash to the plaintiff and another sum of Rs. 1,000/- was paid subsequently. A further sum of Rs. 1,000/- was also paid in 1977 and endorsed on the promissory-note. Excepting the said debt incurred on 29.12.1971, the defendants had not incurred any loan from the plaintiff. The defendants also denied that they had borrowed another sum of Rs. 2,000/- on 10.10.1975.