KADARKARAI REDDIAR Vs. ARUMUGAM NADAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal by the plaintiff is against the dismissal of his suit O. S. No. 523 of 1979 on the file of Sub Court, Tirunelveli. The suit is for recovery of Rupees 10,000/ - as principal with interest due on a promissory note alleged to have been executed by the defendant.

(2.) The case of the plaintiff as found in the plaint is that he lent Rs.10, 000/- to the defendant on 5-10-1975 and obtained from him a promissory note, wherein he agreed to pay interest at the rate of 12% per annum along with principal on demand, that the defendant did not choose to discharge the promissory note in spite of the plaintiff's written demand by notice dated 6-10-79 and that the suit is filed belatedly only in view of the operation of stay and bar of suit against the defendant by virtue of Act 15 of 1976.

(3.) The plea in the written statement may be summarised as follows: The defendant borrowed only a sum of Rs. 2,000/ - from the plaintiff and signed two blank papers affixed with stamps as a result of compulsion of the circumstances. He agreed to pay 36% interest for the sum of Rs. 2,000/ - acting under acute necessity. He did not receive Rs. 10,000/-from the plaintiff. He has paid the total interest of Rs. 60/ - to the plaintiff due for several months and finally paid back the principal of Rs. 2,000 / - in March, 1979. Then he requested the plaintiff to return the stamped and signed papers kept by him. The plaintiff explained that he has kept the papers in a safe place during the period of stringent execution of MISA, that he found it difficult to get back the papers and promised to trace and return them to the defendant in due course. The plaintiff did not issue receipt for having received Rs. 2,000/- in repayment. The plaintiff has fabricated the promissory note upon the blank papers containing the defendant's signature. He sent a reply notice describing the real position.