DAMODAR NAIK Vs. GAYADHARA NAIK AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) DEFENDANT No. 3 is the Appellant. Banamali, the father of Gayadhar (Defendant No. 1), Kanduri (Defendant No. 2) and Damodar (Defendant No. 3) are three brothers. It is the case of the Plaintiff that these three brothers constituted a joint family of which the father of the 1st. Defendant was the Karta. These three brothers had some litigation with their agnates in connection with the said litigation, Banamali and Kanduri borrowed a sum of Rs. 700/ - in several instalments from the Plaintiff for meeting the expenses of the family litigation. On 28 -12 -1951 Banamali and Kanduri had executed and registered the suit hand -note for the aforesaid amount with interest at 9 % per annum. On 1 -9 -1957 Defendants 1 and 2 paid a sum of Rs. 80/ - towards the said loan and made necessary endorsement to save limitation. As on repeated demands, the Defendants failed to repay the loan, the Plaintiff filed the present suit for realisation of the amount.

(2.) THE claim was admitted by Defendants 1 and 2, but was contested by Defendant No. 3 alone. According to him he did not know anything about the loan, nor was there any necessity for the same.

(3.) MR . R.N. Misra, learned Counsel for the Appellant, did not challenge the correctness of the finding of the appellate court. He, however, contended that the suit being one based on the handnote ana not on the original loans advanced from time to time, it is only the executants of the document who would be liable for the debt and no other.