KUMARI USHA JAIN Vs. SHANTI DEVI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard. Sri Sumit Daga, learned Counsel for appellant on the admission of appeal. This second appeal has been preferred by plaintiff, challenging the judgments and decree of the Courts below, whereby suit for recovery of money, filed by her, has been dismissed.

(2.) For the sake of convenience, parties shall be referred as they were described in Trial Court, i.e., as plaintiff/defendant, unless specified otherwise.

(3.) A suit for recovery for money was filed alleging that defendant is closely related to plaintiff and that in order to carry out repairs of her car, defendant was in need of ' 60,000/-, which was advanced by plaintiff against a promissory note alleged to have been signed by defendant under which defendant was obliged to return the said amount alongwith interest @ 6% per month. It is alleged that as said amount was not repaid, plaintiff-appellant served a notice of demand and thereafter instituted the present suit. The suit was resisted by defendant on the ground that there existed no family relationship between the two as they belonged to two different castes. It was further alleged that defendant had neither taken alleged advance from the plaintiff nor did she ever possess any car with registration No. U.S.V.-9191. It was further stated that she is absolutely illiterate.