HARBHAGWAN Vs. MONA RAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Challenge in this appeal is to the judgement and decree dated 01.07.2012 passed by Additional Civil Judge (Senior Division), Ellenabad, by which suit for recovery for an amount of Rs. 11,57,789/-, which includes the principal amount of Rs. 9,14,118/- alongwith interest of Rs. 2,43,667/-, stands decreed with 6% interest, appeal against which preferred by the appellantdefendant stands dismissed by the District Judge, Sirsa, on 07.05.2014.

(2.) It is the contention of learned counsel for the appellant that the suit of the respondent-plaintiff is barred by limitation as the claim, which has been made in the present suit with regard to alleged loan given to the appellant-defendant, is for the period from 01.04.2003 to 11.09.2003. He, thus, contends that the suit having been filed on 19.09.2006 would be barred by limitation and, thus, the suit should have been dismissed on this score alone. That apart, he contends that the minor son of the appellant-defendant, namely, Rajiv, has been handed over the money without any authority given to him by appellant-defendant nor has he been impleaded as a party respondent. He accordingly contends that the amount, which has been allegedly received by Rajiv, cannot be said to be the liability of the appellant-defendant. He further states that neither the bahi khatas have been proved nor the signatures of appellant-defendant thereon, rather these entries are forged and fabricated as the signatures of the appellant-defendant were obtained on the account books when the same were blank and the additions with regard to the loan amount having been made would, thus, be of no use to the claim, as put-forth by the respondent-plaintiff, and the same cannot be sustained. Prayer has, thus, been made for setting-aside the impugned judgements and for dismissing the suit of the respondentplaintiff.

(3.) I have considered the submissions made by learned counsel for the appellant and with his assistance have gone through the impugned judgements.