V THANGARAJ Vs. SANKARAN FINANCIERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal arises against the judgment-dated 11-8-1993 by the learned Subordinate Judge, Vellore, in o. S. No. 483 of 1988, in decreeing the suit. Defendant is the appellant.

(2.) THE suit is based on a pronote, which is marked as Ex. A-4 purported to have been executed by defendant on 16-8-1986 agreeing to repay the said amount on demand to plaintiff or as directed by him with interest at the rate of 24% per annum. The pronote also shows that there was a cash consideration of Rs. 22,000/- thereunder, which was attested by Gajaraj, who was examined as p. W. 1 and scribed by one Pichandi.

(3.) THE appellant/defendant pointed out that neither the scribe nor the plaintiff was examined. But the plaintiff has chosen to examine his father as P. W. 1, who claims to have known the facts of the case including the suit borrowal. The defendant's contention is that under different circumstances he has signed in a blank pronote form and given it to plaintiff. When defendant thus admitted his signature found in Ex. A-4 pronote and stated that it was executed in a blank form then there arises a legal presumption under Section 118 of Negotiable instruments Act that the instrument was prima facie supported for consideration. This presumption is rebuttable and the defendant, who was examined as D. W. 1 would say that when there was transaction with sankaran Financiers, plaintiffs finance company, he happened to give a blank signed pronote form; besides there were other transactions including mortgage to one jothi Chettiar.