K S DORAISWAMI NADAR Vs. SIVANUPANDIA NADAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an appeal from an order passed by Horwill, J., under Section 476 of the Criminal Procedure Code, directing that a complaint be filed against the appellant, charging him with having committed an offence under Section 471, Indian Penal Code.

(2.) The appellant was the organiser of a chit fund and the respondent was a subscriber. The respondent filed a suit in the Court of the Subordinate Judge of Tinnevelly to recover from the appellant the sum of Rs. 850, with interest amounting to Rs. 88-8-8, which he alleged was due to him by the appellant in respect of subscriptions paid to the chit fund. It was a small cause suit. The defence was that all moneys due to the respondent had been repaid. On the 4 February, 1939, there was, it was said, due to the plaintiff on balance the sum of Rs. 467- 1-4. Of this, Rs. 17-1-4, was remitted and Rs. 130 was adjusted against a promissory note alleged to have been executed by the respondent and another in favour of the appellant. This left Rs. 320 which the appellant paid over to the respondent, who granted him a receipt for the amount. The Subordinate Judge accepted the evidence adduced by the appellant and dismissed the suit. The respondent alleged that the promissory note and the receipt were forgeries, but after consideration of the evidence the Subordinate Judge held that they were genuine documents.

(3.) Against the decree dismissing the suit, the respondent filed an application for revision under Section 25 of the Provincial Small Cause Courts Act, 1887. The petition was heard by Horwill, J., who took a different view of the evidence with regard to the receipt. He accepted the finding of the Subordinate Judge that the promissory note was genuine, but he considered that the receipt had been forged. As the result he passed a decree in favour of the respondent for Rs. 320 with interest. Subsequently the respondent applied for an order directing the appellant's prosecution under Section 476, Criminal Procedure Code, and his application was granted. Hence this appeal.