MANIK CHAKRABORTY Vs. JITEN CH DAS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. S.P. Roy, learned counsel for the appellant, assisted by Mr. K. Roy. None appears for the respondent.

(2.) The facts briefly stated are that the respondent/plaintiff is a businessman by profession and the proprietor of M/s Hiren Stores located at Rangapara. The appellant/defendant was an employee and was looking after and maintaining the Sales Tax and Income Tax Registers in respect of the plaintiff's business. On 11.09.1994 the respondent/plaintiff had lent a sum of Rs. 20,000/- to the appellant/defendant by executing a Hand Note and on condition that the same would be repaid with interest @ 10%. A further sum of Rs. 9,000/- was also lent on 09.11.1994 on the same terms and conditions by execution of a Hand Note. The appellant/defendant having failed to repay the amount, the respondent/plaintiff was constrained to institute Money Suit No. 33 of 1997 before the Court of the Civil Judge (Senior Division) Sonitpur, Tezpur. The appellant/defendant contested the suit and had also filed a written statement, denying the averments made in the plaint in toto, besides taking the categorical stand that the transaction was void/voidable in law and the respondent/plaintiff was debarred from instituting the suit inasmuch as he had no license to lend money as required under the law.

(3.) The judgment and decree in the said Money Suit No. 33 of 1997 was passed on 19.08.2002 on the basis of the issues so framed and upon appreciation of the deposition of one witness from either side and the Hand Notes which were exhibited as Ext. 1 and 2. The Trial Court held that the suit was maintainable in view of the fact that the appellant/defendant had failed to show otherwise. The Trial Court while discussing Issue No. 4 had also taken note of the decision rendered in (1984) 2 GLR 118, which is a case discussing Section 7D of The Assam Money Lenders' Act, 1934. The said decision did not fall for consideration as in the opinion of the Trial Court no such plea had been taken by the defendant in his written statement. Accordingly, the suit was decreed against the appellant/defendant for a sum of Rs. 37,550/- on contest with cost and with interest at 6% per annum on the decretal amount from the date of institution till realisation of the decretal amount.