MELLACHERUVU PUNDARIKAKSHUDU Vs. KUPPA VENKATAKRISHNA SASTRI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a Letters Patent Appeal against the judgment of our learned brother Viswanathasastry J.

(2.) The facts are not in dispute and they may be briefly stated. The appellant sued the respondent for recovery of a sum of Rs. 1330/- on the foot of a promissory note dated 14-8-1948 for a sum of Rs. 1050/- repayable with interest at the rate of 9 per cent per annum. That promissory note was executed in renewal of a prior promissory note dated 14-3-1945. The Court below held that there was no proof of the earlier borrowing than that evidenced by the promissory note dated 14-3-1945. Though the earlier promissory note was not produced the courts below fixed the principal of that promissory note by working back and deducting from the sum of Rs. 1050/- due under Ex. A-1 interest over the statutory rate of 5 1/2 per cent included therein and gave a decree for that amount with subsequent interest at 6 1/2 per cent per annum from 14-3-1945 till 29-7-1947 and at 5 1/2 per cent from the latter date. It was contended before Viswanatha Sastri J. that, as the suit promissory note was executed after the Madras Agriculturists'Relief Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act) came into force, the respondent would not be entitled to trace back his debt to the earlier promissory note of the year 1945. The learned Judge rejected that contention and held that the latter promissory note sued on should be held not to be supported by consideration to the extent of the excess over the sum legally payable under the earlier document calculated with interest at the rate provided by the Act. In that view and relying on the provisions of Section 44 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, the learned Judge confirmed the decree given by Courts below. Hence the appeal.

(3.) Learned counsel for the appellant contends that, under the provisions of Section 13 of the Act which applies to debts incurred after the coming into force of the Act, the Court is not entitled to go behind the contract and, therefore, he would to entitled to a decree for the amount covered by Ex. A-l with simple interest at 6i per cent per annum. Section 13 reads:-