LACHHIA LIMJI Vs. NAGINDAS CHHOTALAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is an appeal by the defendant against the decree of the lower appellate Court on a promissory note passed by him in the plaintiff's favour. The note was passed on September 3, 1930, for Rs. 386. It was stated in the plaint that although the suit was brought on August 15, 1939, more than three years after the promissory note, limitation was saved because of two payments of Rs, 5 and Rs. 45 having been made by the defendant and endorsed on the promissory note under his thumb-marks. The payments were on August 22, 1933, and August 15, 1936, and it was alleged that as the suit was within three years from the date of the last payment under the defendant's thumb-mark, it was within time. The defendant's answer was that the promissory note was not supported by any consideration, and that in any case the suit was time-barred, inasmuch as the two alleged payments, even if proved, were not sufficient to save limitation.

(2.) THE trial Court held on the evidence that the consideration as well as the alleged repayments were not proved and that it was not also proved that the thumb-marks were put by the defendant. THE burden of proof was on the plaintiff as the defendant was an agriculturist. On both the grounds, therefore, the suit was dismissed.