BARHAMDEO SINGH Vs. KARI SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal has arisen out of a simple money suit based on a hand-note for Rs. 1,600 said to have been executed by the defendant on one of the leaves of a bahi. The trial Court dismissed the suit, holding that the hand-note was not genuine. On appeal by the plaintiff the learned District Judge has come to a different conclusion and has decreed the suit. The appeal seems to be concluded by the findings of fact. There is no question which can be gone into in a second appeal. Two points were urged on behalf of the appellant. One was that the suit ought not to have been decreed, as according to the learned District Judge the bahi, on one of the leaves of which the hand-note was executed, was not kept in the regular course of business. It is obvious that the plaintiff's suit was not based upon any account entered into the bahi but on the basis of the hand-note, and the hand-note alone. Once the hand note is proved to be genuine, the question of the books not having been kept in the regular course of business is immaterial.

(2.) The next question urged was that the hand-note recites that the consideration passed in cash. This has not been accepted by the learned District Judge. He has held that in fact the consideration for the hand-note was the previous dues payable by the defendant to the plaintiff. The learned Advocate has contended that on this finding the suit ought to have been dismissed. The suit, as I have said, is based upon a hand-note, and under Sec. 118, Negotiable Instruments Act, them is a presumption that it was given for consideration. In this case while the hand-note mentions one kind of consideration the finding of the learned District Judge is that there was a consideration of a different nature, namely the previous dues. I do not think that the suit was liable to be dismissed for this reason. I would dismiss this appeal with costs. Rowland, J.

(3.) I agree.