HARIKRISHAN AGARWALLA Vs. BAIJNATH MAHAJAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PLAINTIFF files this appeal against the reversing judgment of the learned Subordinate Judge of Balangir dismissing the Plaintiff's suit.

(2.) THE Plaintiff. filed the suit to recover a sum of Rs. 2000/ - paid by him to the Defendant. According to the plaint allegations the Plaintiff paid this amount on 21 -4 -1952 on the Defendant agreeing to mortgage his building at Titlagarh. The terms of the mortgage deed (Ext. 1) are that it was agreed between the parties that the Defendant should repay the sum of Rs. 2000/ - In quarterly instalments of Rs. 800/ - each and in default of payment of anyone instalment the entire money shall become due and the Plaintiff will be entitled to sue for recovery of the same; and that the Defendant should continue to be in possession of the house mortgaged agreeing to pay a rent of Rs. 20/ - per month. The Defendant never paid any amount towards rent also. The Plaintiff's case is that the Defendant having failed to pay anything, the suit Is filed to recover the sum of Rs. 2000/ -.

(3.) THE learned Munsif, after a careful consideration of the points raised by the Defendant, came to the conclusion that the document was executed by Defendant and that Rs. 2000/ - were actually received by him from the Plaintiff. He held that the Plaintiff was a money -lender in the usual course of business, but as the suit transaction was not a loan, the Plaintiff was entitled to recover.