POLURU NARASIMHULU Vs. LEELA KRISHNA TEXTILES

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Sri K.N. Jwala, the learned Counsel representing the revision petitioner and Mrs. Haritha, the learned Amicus Curiae appointed by the Court to assist the Court.

(2.) The revision is filed under Section 25 of the Provincial Small Cause Courts Act, 1887 as against an order dated 16-1-2001 in S.R.No. 5267 in unnumbered S.C. No......./ 2000 dated 16-10-2000 on the file of the Senior Civil Judge, Proddutur. The revision is filed as against an order rejecting the plaint on the ground that the suit is based on an unstamped promissory note and hence, the same is not maintainable.

(3.) The facts in brief are that the revision petitioner-plaintiff had instituted a suit on small cause side on the file of the Senior Civil Judge, Proddutur for recovery of an amount of Rs.7,000/- on the strength of an agreement-letter executed by the respondent defendant on 15-5-1998. It was specifically pleaded in the plaint that the respondent-defendant had executed an agreement-letter in his own handwriting and that the respondent-defendant paid Rs.1,000;- on 27-12-1999 and Rs.1,000/- on 25-1-2000 and made endorsements in the note book of the respondent-defendant with the signature of the revision petitioner-plaintiff. An objection was raised on the ground that the suit is not maintainable on an unstamped promissory note. It is, no doubt, true that the document is in a printed form and as can be seen from the document it is, no doubt, named as 'promissory note'.