DEVARAJ Vs. MUTHUVALLI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Civil Revision Petition has been filed against the fair and decreetal order dated 24.07.2017 passed in I.A.No.103 of 2017 in O.S.No.68 of 2007 on the file of Subordinate Judge, Pudukkottai.

(2.) The suit has been filed by the respondent herein against the petitioner for specific performance of the sale agreement dated 20.05.2004 alleged to have been executed by the petitioner. The defence of the petitioner is that the respondent is a professional money lender and the petitioner approached the respondent for the loan of Rs.3,00,000.00, for which, the respondent put conditions such as to execute a registered sale agreement in respect of the suit property and to execute a general power of attorney in favour of a person of his choice and to put up his signatures in blank non judicial stamp papers and blank promissory notes. Such action was done by the petitioner due to financial crisis. According to the petitioner, the respondent has also filed another suit in O.S.No.60 of 2007 against this petitioner for recovery of money through one Palanisamy by filling up a blank signed promissory note which was given by the petitioner in lieu of the said loan.

(3.) The petitioner would submit that till 20.06.2005, he paid a sum of Rs.78,000.00 towards the loan amount and paid a sum of Rs.1,00,000.00 towards the principal amount and Rs.6,000.00 towards the interest on 20.07.2005 and continued to pay the monthly interest of Rs.4,000.00 regularly till 20.04.2006. The petitioner was ready to pay the balance principal amount of Rs.2,00,000.00 subject to the return of the signed blank papers and abandonment of O.S.No.60 of 2007. After the evidence of the respondent/plaintiff's side, the petitioner/defendant herein examined himself as DW1 and one Rajavel S/o.Subbiah was examined in chief as DW2 on 02.11.2016 and at the request of the respondent counsel, the case was adjourned to 08.11.2016 and then to 16.11.2016 for cross examination. On 16.11.2016, DW2 turned hostile and deposed that the petitioner herein had committed an offence in dealing with counterfeit currency and spoken contrary to his evidence in the chief examination.