ROOPCHAND Vs. PREMCHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a revision application by the defendants against an order of the District Judge Pali holding that a certain writing is not a promissory note.

(2.) ACCORDING to the case of the plaintiffs, who have filed the writing and who seek to prove it, they and the defendants carried on business in partnership at Pali. This business was closed on Kartik Sudi 1 S. 2004. Then the parties started another partnership business at Falna. Accounts were settled on 25-12-52 and by mutual agreement the plaintiff withdrew from the partnership. A sum of Rs. 35,956/6/6 remained due to them from the defendants on that date. All the assets and liabilities of the partnership business were taken over by the defendants. Two letters were written on that date one by each party. The letter written by the defendants in favour of the plaintiffs which is the subject matter of the present revision application runs as follows: - "bhai Multanmal Santok Chandji Sri Bali, Written from Falna. Greetings from Bhai Roop Chand Hans Rajji. We were carrying on business in wood and cotton seed in partnership, shares being equal, in the name of Veer Chand Roop Chand at Falna station and we had business in partnership, shares being equal at Pali under the name and style of Prem Chand Heera-Chand & Co. in wood, cotton-seed, stone, glass etc. We have understood the accounts of both these partnerships today. Your share of profit has been fixed at Rs. 5000/ -. All the assets and liabilities have been taken over by us. You are no longer responsible for partnership dealings. A sum of Rs. 24125/8/- has been found due to you in the accounts of Veer Chand Roopchand upon Kartik Sudi 1 S. 2008. Further a sum of Rs. 9510/8/9 which you Multan Mal Santok-Chand invested in firm Prem Chand Heerachand & Co. is also due to you on Kartik Sudi 1 S. 2004. Thus Rs. 24125/8/- principal and Rs. 075/9/3 interest and Rs. 9510/8/9 Principal and Rs 2000/1/9 interest upto today half of which comes to Rs. 5752/5/3 and together with Rs. 5000/- due as profits, all the three items totalling Rs. 35,956/6/ remain to be paid by us. This will carry interest at annas -/6/- percent per mensem. We have also taken a letter from you about these matters. Dated Poh Sudi 9 S. Scribed by Ranawat Umedmal Jawaharmalji resident of Bali at the instance of Roopchand Hans Rajji at Falna Station. Sd/ - Roop Chand Bagrecha. The contention on behalf of the defendants is that this document amounts to a promissory note. The contention on behalf of the plaintiffs is that it does not contain an undertaking to pay and it cannot amount to a promissory note. It is an agreement.