(1.) The defendant is in appeal against the reversing judgment of the learned Subordinate Judge (presently designated as Civil Judge, Senior, Division). Nayagarh passed in Money Appeal No. 2 of 1955. By the impugned judgment he set aside the judgment and decree of the learned Additional Munsiff, Ranpur, whereby plaintiff's suit for recovery of Rs. 3,957.50 p. based on a pronote was dismissed.
(2.) Plaintiff's case, in brief, is that the defendant being in need of money to meet the expenses of his saw-mill and to repay his other loans, took a loan of Rs. 5,000/- from the plaintiff by executing a pronote. According to the plaintiff he was a registered money-lender at the time the loan was advanced, but he closed his money-lending business in 1970. The defendants made payments on two occasions, inasmuch as on 24-3-70 he paid a sum of Rs. 100/- and on 23-3-73 he paid Rs. 5,300/-. Thereafter he did not make any payment. Hence the suit.
(3.) Defendant on being noticed file written statement. According to him, he had incurred a loan of Rs. 2,000/- from the plaintiff, but a pronote for Rs. 5,000/- was obtained from him. He made payment of Rs. 1,000/- on 24-3-1970 in the morning and Rs. 6,300/- in the afternoon. Only a sum of Rs. 110/- remained to be paid. Later on he went with the aforesaid amount and offered to the plaintiff, but could not make payment since the plaintiff gave out that the pronote was not traceable.