SHRIKISHAN Vs. BHANWARLAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a plaintiff's second appeal arising out of a money suit based on a promissory note marked Ex. 1 on the record.

(2.) THE plain tiff -appellant Shri -kishan's case as set out in the plaint is that Ganpatlal deceased took a loan of Rs. 1,000/ - from him for joint family business on 29 -1 -1963 bearing interest at 'Rs. 1.50% per month and executed a promissory note and a receipt in lieu thereof as a collateral security, the same day. He has further alleged that the defendants Nos. 1 and 2 Bhanwarlal and Ramniwas brothers of Ganpatlal constituted a joint Hindu family with Ganpat Lal who left behind his widow Smt. Kamla Bai - -defendant No. 2, three sons defendants Nos. 4, 5 and 6 - -Mahendra, Kailash and Rajkumar respectively and a daughter defendant No. 7 Smt. Ramu Bai. A decree for Rs. 1,000/ - principal and Rs. 75/ - as interest was prayed for against all the defendants. Defendants 'Nos. 1 and 2 denied the execution of the promissory note as well as its consideration and further pleaded that they never constituted a joint Hindu family with 'Ganpat Lal nor had any joint family business with Ganpat Lal. Defendant No. 3 also denied the suit. A separate written statement on behalf of defendants Nos. 4 to 7 (minors) was filed by their Court -Guardian Shri Aklesh Chandra Ojha, Advocate. It was a denial of the plaintiff's claim based on lack of know ledge.

(3.) A preliminary objection was raised by the learned counsel for the respondents that there is no valid appeal against the minor respondents Nos. 4 to 7 as they have not been impleaded through the proper guardian appointed by the Court, but their mother Smt. Kamla Bai (respondent No. 3) has beenshown as their guardian in the Memo of Appeal.