LOKANATH Vs. BIRABARA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Defendant No.2 is the petitioner against a reversing judgment.

(2.) Plaintiff admittedly a registered money-lender advanced Rs. 800/- on the basis of a hand-note (Ext.1) on 23-3-1968 to the petitioner and his father Lokanath. In the hand-note there are two endorsements by Lokanath on 6-2-1971 and 25-1-1974, paying some money towards interest whereby he acknowledged the loan. As no further endorsement was made and the suit loan was not discharged, plaintiff filed O.S.No.6/77, Class-Ill, in the Court of learned Munsif, Bhubaneswar for realisation of the loan against Lokanath and Raghunath.

(3.) In paragraph 5 of the plaint, it was asserted that he was a registered money-lender having licence of the year 1966 from the Sub-Registrar, Bhubaneswar, which was subsequently renewed in 1971 and 1975. In the joint written statement filed by the defendants on 20th July, 1977, the suit was alleged to be not maintainable in view of the recent amendment to the Orissa Money-lenders Act. On account of the dispute relating to the execution of the document, it was examined by the handwriting expert and the expert has adduced evidence as witness No.1 for the Court. The plaintiff examined himself as P.W.1. Defendants have not examined any witness in this case. The trial Court dismissed the suit on the ground that it was barred by limitation since there is no acknowledgment of the debt as required under S. 20 of the Limitation Act by defendant No.2. The appellate Court, however, reversed the judgment on the finding that the acknowledgment by the father will also be treated as acknowledgement of the son.