S. MANI Vs. G. RAMESH BABU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE plaintiff in the original suit O.S.No.161 of 2004 on the file of Principal District Munsif, Ambur is the appellant in the second appeal. He filed the suit for recovery of money due under two promissory notes dated 27.05.2000 and 26.06.2000, allegedly executed by the respondent herein/defendant for Rs.10,000/ - and Rs.20,000/ - respectively, agreeing to repay the same with an interest at the rate of 24% per annum. The suit was resisted by the respondent herein/defendant contending that the appellant herein/plaintiff was in the habit of lending money to the downtrodden and collect meter vatti/kandhu vatti; that one Saffique, who is employed along with the plaintiff in Bismillah hotel, had borrowed Rs.2,000/ - from the appellant/plaintiff on daily interest basis; that on 20.07.2002 at about 7.30 p.m, the plaintiff came to the said hotel in an inebriated mood and threatened the said Saffique and even made an attempt to stab him with a knife; that the said attempt was prevented by the respondent herein/defendant by rescuing saffique and he helped the said Saffique in lodging a complaint with police and that the same infuriated the plaintiff to forge the suit promissory notes and file the false case against the respondent herein/defendant.

(2.) THE learned trial judge framed necessary issues that were 5 in number and conducted a trial, in which three witnesses were examined as PWs.1 to

(3.) UNDER Section 100 CPC, a second appeal from the judgment of the appellate court subordinate to the High Court shall lie to the High Court only on a substantial question of law. At the time of admission of the second appeal, the following question was identified and formulated to be the substantial question of law involved in the second appeal.