GANGA Vs. BEHARI LAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an application in revision against a decision of the Munsif decreeing the plaintiff's suit in its entirety with costs and pendente lite and future interest. The learned Munsif, however, directed payment of the amount decreed to be made in instalments.

(2.) The plaintiffs sued for the recovery of a sum of Rs. 1869/5/6 on the basis of "bahi khatas". The suit had been filed against a father and his three minor sons; the father was Chhotey Lal and his minor sons were the three applicants before me. Chhotey Lal the father's defence, in the main, was that there was no contractual liability to pay interest on the sum, and further that he had made a payment of Rs. 587/1/9 and that by mistake the plaintiffs had given credit for only Rs. 87/5/9. The defence of the minors was a total denial of any liability; the minors clearly said that whatever may have been the liability of the father, they were not liable for the payment back of any amount.

(3.) One Rajrup Dube Vakil had been appointed guardian ad litem of the minors. At the trial Chhotey Lal stated that if Salik Ram plaintiff No. 2 stated on Gangajali (a special form of oath) that the plaintiffs had not received a sum of Rs. 587/1/9 in repayment of the loan but had only received the sum of Rs. 87/5/9 then the entire suit may be decreed against the defendants. Rajrup Dube, the guardian of the minors, also made a statement similar to the one which had been made by Chhotey Lal, Salik Ram took the oath according to the offer and stated that Chhotey Lal had only paid Rs. 87/5/9 and not Rs. 587/1/9, as alleged by him. The result was that the court below, accepting the statement of Salik Ram and acting under the provisions of Section 11 of the Indian Oaths Act (Act X of 1873), decreed the plaintiff's suit.