GAURISHANKER Vs. MAGHARAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a defendant's appeal arising out of a suit instituted by the plaintiff-respondent for recovery of a sum of Rs 4,000 as principal and Rs. 1096 as interest total Rs. 5096 on the basis of a khata dated 10. 10. 67.

(2.) IT was alleged that the defendant borrowed a sum of Rs. 4000 from the plaintiff on 10-10 67 and executed a khata (Ex. 1) in his own hand-writing in the bahi of the plaintiff and promised to repay the same with interest at the rate of fifteen annas per cent per month.

(3.) THE question that arises for consideration is whether the plaintiff was a money-lender at the time he advanced the loan. THE term 'money-lender' is defined in clause (l0) of sec. 2 of the Act. Again, the expression 'business of money-lending' is defined in clause (2) of sec. 2 of the Act It runs as under: " (2) 'business of money-lending' means the business of advancing loans, whether or not in connection with or in addition to any other business. It is contended by the defendant's learned counsel that the plaintiff in his statement admitted that he advanced loans to others and that evidence is sufficient to hold that he was a money-lender within the meaning of clause (13) of sec. 2 of the Act. THE relevant portion of the plaintiff's statement on which reliance has been placed reads as under: ************ THEre is no other evidence on the point. THE question arises whether it can be inferred from the above statement that the plaintiff engaged himself in the business of advancing loans. In my opinion, the answer must be in the negative. THE mere fact that the money was advanced on interest on more than one occasion would not necessarily import that he was engaged in the business of advancing loans, nor does a man become money-lender merely because he may on one or several isolated occasions lend money to a stranger. THE word 'business' imports the notion of system, repetition and continuity. In (1906) 1 KB 584, it was observed that: " Speaking generally, a man who carries on a money-lending business is one who is ready and willing to lend to all sundry, provided that they are from his point of view eligible. " To the same effect are the observations contained in (1896) AC 325 at page 343. Lord Morris is reported to have observed as follows: " THEre can be no definition of the words "exercising a trade. " It is only another mode of expressing "carrying on business"; but it certainly carries with it the meaning that the business or trade must be habitually or systematically exercised and that it cannot apply to isolated transactions. " Similarly, it was held by a Full Bench of the Allahabad High Court in 17 A. L. J. 1147 that "an element of continuity and habit is essential to constitute the exercise of a profession or business". In the present case, the statement of the plaintiff simply shows that he was a casual money-lender and not a professional money-lender who alone is contemplated under clause (10) of sec. 2 of the Act. In my opinion, the learned Additional District Judge was right in holding that the plaintiff was not a money-lender within the meaning of the Act.