JAGANATH PADHI Vs. B. MADHA PATRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS revisional application has been preferred against a reversing judgment of the learned Additional District Judge, Ganjam, Boudh dismissing the Plaintiff's suit for recovery of money on the basis of the handnote.

(2.) PLAINTIFF Petitioner filed the suit for recovery of Rs. 680/ - on the allegation that the loan was advanced by him on the execution of a handnote by the Defendant on the 20th day of May, 1969 and that no payment has been made in spite of demands.

(3.) AT the trial, the Parties did not adduce any other oral evidence except examining themselves. The learned Munsif discarded the blank paper theory advanced by the Defendant and further held that the signature of the executant appearing on the suit handnote is that of the Defendant. Relying on the solitary testimony of the Plaintiff, he came to the finding that execution of the handnote Ext. 1 by the Defendant was proved and applying the provisions of Section 118 of the Negotiable Instrument Act he put the onus on the Defendant and finding that the onus was not discharged he granted a decree in favour of the Plaintiff. On appeal, the learned Addl. Dist. Judge noticed some suspicious features surrounding the suit handnote and came to hold that the Plaintiff had failed to discharge the onus of proving due execution of the handnote. Accordingly he dismissed the Plaintiff's suit.