RAM SARUP Vs. JASODHA KUNWAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal arises out of a suit in which the plaintiff sought to recover certain money. A portion of the money was due upon accounts pure and simple for goods sold. Another portion of it the plaintiff claimed as having been advanced by him to the defendant and for which a certain document, alleged to be a promissory note, was passed. The claim is then made for Rs. 35-11-6 the price of cloth; Rs. 400 principal and Rs. 140-6-0 interest, that is, Rs. 540-6-0, in respect of a cash debt, in all Rs. 576-1-6, due under account books together with the costs of the suit and future interest. It will thus be seen that the plaintiff bases his claim upon his account books, and it is a claim for money lent. When the document to which we have referred was produced, it appears that the stamp was cancelled by means of two lines drawn crosswise upon it.

(2.) The court of first instance decreed the plaintiff s claim, but holding that the stamp was not effectively cancelled, allowed other evidence, including the account books, to be given as evidence of the loan. The document, which it held to amount to a promissory note, was excluded from evidence.

(3.) The defendants appealed, and the lower appellate court, adopting the view of the court of first instance that the document was a promissory note and that the stamp was not effectively cancelled, refused to allow the plaintiff s claim, except for the price of the cloth and reduced the decree of the court of first instance accordingly.