(1.) The plaintiff's case is that it carried on business in sale of motor vehicles, etc. on hire-purchase system, by executing a deed of agreement on 21st Sept., 1963. the plaintiff agreed to sell the truck in question to defendant No. 1, on hire-purchase system and defendant No. 2 became the guarantor. The price of the vehicle was fixed at Rs. 10,000.00, Rs. 2,000.00 was paid. It was agreed that the balance of Rs. 8,000.00together with the hire-purchase charges amounting to Rs. 1,980.00 would be paid in 18 equal instalments. For the first month Rs. 545.00 was payable and the subsequent payments would be made at the rate of Rs. 555.00commencing from the 5th Nov., 1965. It was also agreed that hire-purchase charges would be paid at the rate of Rs. 100.00 per month if there be any default. After the 21st May, 1965, defendant did not make any further payment. So the agreement came to an end. But after the termination of the agreement, defendant No. 1 did not return the vehicle or make any payment. The suit is fora declaration of the plaintiff's title to the vehicle in question, for recovery of possession thereof and alternatively, for recovering a sum of Rs. 9,670.00 on account of the amount due under the contract and compensation.
(2.) Defendant No. 2 stated that he was not the guarantor.
(3.) Defendant No. 1 took the plea that the alleged agreement was not read over or explained to him. He did not know English language in which the deed of agreement had been drawn up. The vehicle met with an accident and a sum of Rs. 3,501.00 was paid by the Union Co-operative Insurance Society Ltd. to defendant No. 1. He made over that amount to the plaintiff. But the plaintiff did not give any credit for such sum. The hire-purchase charges are not claimable in law.