NARAYAN NANDA Vs. SANKAR SAHU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE Defendant has preferred this appeal against the judgment and decree of the Additional District Judge, Dhenkanal In Money Appeal No. 7 of 1970 confirming the judgment and decree passed by the Subordinate Judge. Dhenkanal in Money Suit No. 12/4 of 1986/69.

(2.) ACCORDING to the Petitioner the Defendant who was in good relationship with him asked for Rs. 500/ - on 10 -7 -1963 and executed a plain paper document Ext. 1(a) stipulating therein that he would mortgage some of his properties with the Petitioner from which the latter would get payment of the interest for the aforesaid amount advanced to the Defendant. The Petitioner was not given possession of the said land and none of the terms of the agreement on which the said money was taken was given effect to by the Defendant. Again on 10 -9 -1965 the Petitioner advanced another sum of Rs. 300/ - to the Defendant on the latter executing a registered mortgage bond, Ext. 2, acknowledging therein the loan of Rs. 300/ - and also the previous loan of Rs. 500/ -. all told for Rs. 800/ - and mortgage some properties as specifically mentioned in Ext. 2. As in spite of demands the Defendant did not repay the said loan with interest the Petitioner instituted the suit on 11 -9 -1968 for the realisation of the principal sum of Rs. 800/ - together with interest, all told Rs. 1088/ -, and for future interest till its realisation.

(3.) THE trial Court found that it was not proved that the Petitioner was a regular money lender and so the suit was not bit by the provisions of the Orissa Money Lenders Act. It also held that as the Petitioner and Defendant were in good relationship with each other the Petitioner actually advanced a sum of Rs. 500/ - on 10 -7 -1963 and Rs. 300/ - on 9 -9 -1965 and the said loans were acknowledged by the Defendant by executing the registered document Ext. 2 on 10 -9 -1965, and so the Defendant was liable to pay the said loan taken by him from the Petitioner. The trial Court also found that the Petitioner was entitled to get a personal decree against the Defendant for the realisation of the said amount. On the above findings the trial Court in the operative portion of its judgment ordered that the suit be decreed on contest for Rs. 1088/ - with costs and advocate 's fee at the contested scale.