N.SARAVANAPERUMAL Vs. INDIAN BANK

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The suit has been laid by the respondents/plaintiffs on two counts - one is with respect to non-payment of loan amount and the other is misappropriation of amount.

(2.) The appellant was working as a Manager of the respondents. In that capacity, he is stated to have misappropriated huge sums of money. He has also not paid the loan amount obtained. A criminal complaint was also given. After conducting the crime as aforesaid, the appellant executed several documents, including two promissory notes and one letter of undertaking. Incidentally, he has also deposited the title deeds of the documents over which he was having the title.

(3.) Before the trial Court, the appellant took a plea that suit itself is not maintainable. According to the appellant, the documents have been obtained by force and coercion and not voluntarily. For the reasons known to him the appellant did not go into the box to depose. The respondents marked Exs.A1 to A49 and examined PW1 to PW7. The appellant marked Exs.P1 to P12 but did not go into the box to depose. The trial Court framed nine issues. These issues involve the question of pecuniary jurisdiction, issue pertaining to misappropriation, execution of documents by the appellant and the documents having been obtained by force and coercion.