BHAGWATI PRASAD Vs. SHANKER LAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is Defendant's second appeal arising out of a suit for recovery of a sum of Rs. 1372 on the basis of a promissory note dated 27 -6 -60. Both the courts have decreed the suit against the Defendant.

(2.) Learned Counsel for the Appellant has contended that the court below was in error in drawing a presumption Under Sec. 118 of the Negotiable Instruments Act (hereinafter called the Act) about the consideration for the promissory note. The promissory note stated that it was for cash consideration. In the plaint, however, the Plaintiff put forward the case that the cash was advanced on an earlier occasion and a promissory note was executed by the Defendant on 28 -6 -57, the amount of this promissory note was not paid up and hence the present promissory note was executed on 27 -6 - 60 and the consideration for the letter promissory note was the money due under the earlier promissory note.

(3.) Learned Counsel has contended that once the Plaintiff's case itself is against the plaint tenor of the promissory note, no presumption can arise Under Sec. 118 of the Act to the effect that the present negotiable instrument was made or drawn for consideration. Reliance has been placed on the cases Radhey Shyam v/s. Kedar Nath, AIR 1927 MB 82 and V. Reddy v/s. N. Reddy : AIR 1951 Mad 851 for the proposition that no presumption can arise. It was held in the case of V. Reddy v/s. N. Reddy (supra):