PREMNARAYAN Vs. KAILASHCHANDRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BEING aggrieved by judgment and decree dated 29.9.2006 passed by Additional District Judge, Sonkatch, District Dewas whereby the suit filed by the respondent was decreed and the appellant was directed to pay a sum of Rs. 40,000/ - along with interest @ 6% per. annum with effect from 1.8.2002, the present appeal has been filed.

(2.) SHORT facts of the case are that the respondent filed a suit for realization of Rs. 68,500/ - on 19.7.2005 alleging that appellant and respondent are doing the business of Cutlery in Hat Bazar. Respondent gave a sum of Rs. 40,000/ - to the appellant on 1.8.2002, which was payable along with interest @ 2% per month. It was alleged that appellant executed a promissory note in favour of respondent in presence of Jeevan Singh and Kama. It was alleged that since the loan amount was not paid by the appellant hence the sister of the respondent went to the house of the appellant in the year 2004 for demand, at that time appellant quarrelled with the sister of respondent. It was alleged that at that time appellant lodged a false complaint of Dinesh, who happens to be the brother of the respondent. Further case of the respondent was that a demand notice was issued to the appellant on 1.12.2004, which was duly received by the appellant on 4.12.2004. In response to the notice appellant asked for the photostate copy of the promissory note, which was made available to the appellant on 3.3.2005, thereafter false reply was given by the appellant, wherein it was denied that appellant has taken a sum of Rs. 40,000/ - and executed the promissory note. It was alleged that respondent is entitled for a sum of Rs. 68,500/ -, which includes the interest @ 2% per month. Appellant filed written statement, wherein all the plaint allegations were denied. It was denied that appellant has received a sum of Rs. 40,000/ - and has executed the promissory note in favour of respondent.

(3.) ON the basis of pleadings of the parties, learned Court below framed the issues and recorded the evidence and decreed the suit, against which the present appeal has been filed.