MOHD. MAQDOOM MADANI Vs. CHUNILAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a revision petition by the defendant against the Order of the Court of Small Causes, deciding that the Plaintiff must be considered, under the circumstances of the case to be a licence -holder, and as such, the suit will be decided on merits. The facts relating to this Order are that:

(2.) THE plaintiff was a licensed money -lender up to 9 -4 -1357 Fasli. After the expiry of this, he did not have his licence renewed. Later on, after the expiry of about a year, he gave a fresh application for a licence on 2 -3 -1358 P. But before the licence could be issued under the application, the plaintiff advanced a loan on a Promissory Note to the defendant on 11 -3 -1358 F. It is admitted that on this date the plaintiff was not in receipt of a licence from the Government.

(3.) THE learned Advocate for the petitioner argues that under Section 3, Sub -section 5 plaintiff was prohibited from transacting money -lending business and the mere fact that he had applied for a licence was not enough to declare him a licence -holder. On account of the non -observance of Section 3, Sub -section 5, the transaction is null and void. He cites, 1951 Hyd L R 349 and 'Govind Singh v. Vali Mahomed',, AIR 1951 Hyd 44, and in both these decisions it was laid down that any contract in violation of the provisions of Section 3 of the Hyderabad Money Lenders' Act will not be enforceable.