AGASTI MAHANANDA Vs. RAMAPRASAD PADHI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE Plaintiff's suit is based on the promissory note Ext. 1 dated 5 -10 -1966 under which Re. 300/ - was advanced in cash to the Defendant. The Defendant's case is that he is a night -watchman and before he got the service he very often approached the Plaintiff to write some applications on his behalf. In that connection he left some blank papers with the Plaintiff carrying his signatures. The Plaintiff might have used one of such papers for fabricating the suit document. The learned Munsif believed the defence case and dismissed the Plaintiff's suit. In appeal, the learned Subordinate Judge decreed the Plaintiff's suit. Against the appellate judgment this Civil Revision has been filed as the amount involved is below its. 1000/ -, under Section 102, Code of Civil Procedure.

(2.) MR . Panda contended that the learned Subordinate Judge did not keep the proper legal perspective in view and that his judgment is vitiated in as much as he discussed the blank paper theory first.

(3.) IN the result, the Civil Revision fails and is dismissed with costs. Hearing fee of Rs. 32/ -.