(1.) RESPONDENT 1 is the father -in -law of respondent 2. On 18th July 1929 they executed a bond in favour of the petitioner. Under it respondent 2 was to work as a farm laborer for the petitioner. Respondent 2 left the petitioner's employment on 1st May 1942, whereupon the petitioner filed S.C.S. No. 302 of 1943 in the Court of the District Munsif, Tiruturaipundi to recover the money due under the bond. The District Munsif held that the document constituted a slavery bond and dismissed the suit. The question which we are called upon to decide is whether the bond can in law be regarded as 11 slavery bond. The operative part of the bond reads as follows:
(2.) IT will be observed that the defendants received in cash the advance of Rs. 86. This advance was not to be called in while defendant 2 worked for the plaintiff. In case he refused to do so he advance was to be repayable with interest at 2 per cent, per month from the date when the plaintiff ceased to have the use of defendant 2's services. Defendant 2 was not prohibited from applying for service elsewhere.