BHANWAR LAL Vs. CHHITAR LAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PETITIONER preferred this revision petition being aggrieved with the judgment and decree passed by the learned Munsif and Judicial Magistrate, Baran and confirmed by the learned Additional District Judge, Baran in appeal vide his judgment dated, 23. 4. 84.

(2.) PETITIONER instituted a suit against one person of the Scheduled Tribe who is also agriculturist on the basis of the alleged Hundi which is said to have been executed by the agriculturist Scheduled Tribe person in favour of the plaintiff Mahajan. Rule of law is a law to put a check on the exploitation, to put check against those persons who are violating the fundamental principles of the preamble of the Constitution and who are sabotaging the doctrine of equality enshrined in the preamble of the Constitution. Law is meant for the society, society is not meant for the law. Rule of law directs the person to fulfil the requirement of Article 51 A of the Constitution of India, to strive towards the achievement of the goal laid down in the Constitution.

(3.) IT will not be out of place here to mention that the Punjab Hight Court itself has held in Para-8 of the judgment that, 'from what has been said above it is quite clear that a 'shah Jog' Hundi does not technically fall within the definition of a Bill of Exchange or a negotiable instrument as defined by the Negotiable Instruments Act. Punjab High Court has taken the assistance of Section-1 of the Negotiable Instruments Act and held that Section- 1 of the Act expressly recognises such instruments which are written in oriental language and are in vogue on the basis of local usage, IT is well known that Hundis are exchanged in business transactions and the local usage is used as Hundi in commercial transactions. IT is difficult to hold that a businessman while advancing loan to an agriculturist and particularly the person of the Scheduled Caste will deal with the Hundi, unless the intention is to defeat the provisions of the beneficial legislation. Thus, it cannot be said that there is any local usage in Rajasthan or in any part of the country that an agriculturist of Scheduled Tribe will write a Hundi in favour of a Mahajan or a money lender. The case cited by Mr. Bhandari does not help him. On the contrary, this part of the judgment that Shahjog Hundi does not technically fall within the definition of negotiable instrument goes against him.