HARDEV SINGH Vs. JAGDISH PRASAD BANSAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By filing this appeal under Section 96 of the Civil Procedure Code, the appellant/defendant has challenged the validity and legality of the judgment and decree dated 18.10.01 passed by the Court of Additional District Judge, Gohad, District Bhind (Shri R.K. Jain) in Civil Suit No.9B/2000 partly decreeing the suit for the payment of a sum of Rs.1,10,000/- along with the interest @ 6% p.a. from the date of the judgment till realisation of the money. However, the relief for recovery of interest as alleged in the plaint was refused by the learned trial Court as plaintiff did not comply the provision of Money Lenders Act. By this judgment, cross objection under Order 41 Rule 22 of the Civil Procedure Code filed by the respondent/plaintiff is also being decided. In this appeal the appellant is referred as "defendant" and the respondent as "plaintiff."

(2.) The following admitted facts have come on record from the pleadings and evidence of both the parties The plaintiff was engaged in money-lending business, who got money lending certificate Ex-P/5 & Ex-P/6 for the same. Nonetheless, the plaintiff did not send the information regarding defendant's loan transaction to the concerned Registrar as per provision 2(a) of Money Lenders Act and similarly the plaintiff did not send yearly statement to the defendant as per Section 3 of the said Act.

(3.) In brief, facts of the plaint are that defendant borrowed Rs.1,10,000/- @ 2% per month on 15.07.1999 from the plaintiff and executed a promissory note Ex-P/1. The defendant did not pay the borrowed amount inspite of the loan having been demanded by the plaintiff several times. A demand notice dated 06.04.2000 Ex-P/2 was issued vide Registered Postal slip Ex-P/3. The said notice was received by the defendant vide acknowledgment Ex-P/