TARSEM CHAND Vs. BHAG CHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Defendant Tarsem Singh, who has named himself somewhere as Tarsem Chand and somewhere as Tarsem Singh in the revision petition, has filed this revision petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India thereby challenging judgments and decrees of both the courts below whereby suit of plaintiff-respondent Bhag Chand against defendant-petitioner has been decreed. Respondent plaintiff Bhag Chand filed suit against Tarsem Singh defendant (petitioner herein) for recovery of Rs 24,600/- alleging that the petitioner borrowed Rs 16,000/- from the plaintiff on 6.3.2004 for repair of his tractor and agreed to repay the same with interest @ 24% per annum and executed pronote and receipt for the same but the defendant - respondent failed to pay anything either towards principal or towards interest. Accordingly, the plaintiff claimed Rs 16,000/- as principal amount and Rs 8640/- as interest till filing of the suit.

(2.) The defendant denied the plaintiff's averments. The defendant denied having borrowed any amount from the plaintiff or having executed any pronote or receipt. The defendant alleged that his name is Tarsem Chand and he never used his name as Tarsem Singh. The defendant alleged that he is employee of Bhakhra Beas Management Board (BBMB) and thus is government employee and not a farmer and therefore, he had no occasion to raise loan for repair of tractor as alleged by the plaintiff. Various other pleas were also raised.

(3.) Learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), Anandpur Sahib vide judgment and decree dated 24.8.2011 (Annexure P/1) decreed the plaintiff's suit for recovery of principal amount of Rs 16,000/- with interest @ 9% per annum from the date of pronote till date of decree and future interest @ 6% per annum from the date of decree till recovery. First appeal preferred by defendant against judgment and decree of the trial court has been dismissed by learned Additional District Judge, Adhoc (Fast Track Court), Rupnagar vide judgment and decree dated 21.11.2011 (Annexure P/2). Since regular second appeal does not lie in view of section 102 of the Code of Civil Procedure because subject matter of the original suit for recovery of money did not exceed Rs 25,000/- , the defendant has filed this revision petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India to assail the judgments and decrees of the courts below.