M NALLUSAMY Vs. K SUBRAMANIAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE successful plaintiff before the trial Court, having failed to sustain the success before the First Appellate Court has come to this Court as appellant, for the restoration of the decree obtained by him in O. S. No. 211 of 1989 on the file of the District Munsif Court, Thiru chengode.

(2.) THE plaintiff/ appellant moved the trial Court seeking a money decree on the basis of a promissory note dated 17. 8. 1986, for a sum of rs. 10,000/-, which contemplates interest also, contending that the same was executed by the defendant for consideration, despite issue of notice, the defendant, who is not entitled to the benefits of any Debt Relief Act, has failed to repay the same and therefore, a decree should be granted for the recovery of the amount.

(3.) THE respondent/defendant questioning the genuineness of the suit promissory note and alleging that he had no direct money transaction with the plaintiff and in a way disputing the signature and thumb impression in the suit promissory note, disputed the liability; further contending that there was chit transaction between the parties and on one occasion, he became the prized subscriber, where he had affixed his thumb impression and signature in several blank pronotes, to ensure prompt repayment of the installment and if at all that should have been used, because of the fact this defendant intervened on behalf of his brother demanding the plaintiff and ramakrishnan to discharge the promissory note under which the plaintiff and one Ramakrishnan had borrowed some amount from his brother.