NARAIN DAS Vs. KING-EMPEROR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This criminal revision and Criminal Revisions Nos. 35 and 36 of 1927 are connected and arise out of one and the same case. The applicants in all the three cases were convicted by a Magistrate of the first class under Section 193 Indian Indian Penal Code and Narain Pas applicant in Criminal Revision No. 34 of 1927 was sentenced to six months rigorous imprisonment and to a fine of Rs. 200, and Chuttan Lal and Nand Kishore the applicants in the other two cases were sentenced to three months rigorous imprisonment and to a fine of Rs. 100 each. The conviction and the sentences passed on the applicants have been upheld by the learned Sessions Judge.

(2.) Narain Das applicant is a resident of village Pilakhwa and is a substantial zemindar and money-lender. In the same village resides another zemindar named Nathu Mal. The case for the prosecution was that on the 1 February 1925, Nathu Mal agreed to sell to Narain Das 35 bighas 6 biswas of land of a certain village for Rs. 6,500 but for fear of pre-emption it was agreed between Narain Das and Nathu Mal that in the sale-deed Rs. 8,000 was to be stated as the sale consideration. After the agreement for sale had been entered into, Ganpat Rai mukhtar-i-am of Nathu Mal, went to Meerut to purchase and did purchase, a stamp paper of a sufficient value on which a sale deed for a sum of Rs. 8,000 could be executed. On the 3 of February 1925, both Narain Das and Nathu Mal went to Ghaziabad,, and it is said, that Narain Das asked Nathu Mal to give him a pro-note for Rs. 1,500 viz., the difference between the real and the bogus price before the execution of the sale-deed and accordingly Nathu Mal passed a pro-note duly signed by him for the said amount in favour of Narain Das, but antedated the same to the 25 of January 1925. A draft of the sale-deed was also prepared. It is alleged that Narain Das then went to consult his local lawyer Babu Duli Chand and took with him the pro-note, the stamp paper and the draft of the sale-deed. When Narain Das did not return Nathu Mal went in his search and was informed that Narain Das had left for his village. Nathu Mal followed Narain Das and found him in the village, and asked him either to have the sale-deed executed or to return the pro-note. It is said that Narain Das put off the matter and did not get the sale-deed executed nor returned the pro-note. Then Nathu Mal reported the matter to the District Magistrate, but the District Magistrate-took no action and directed Nathu Mal either to file a civil suit or to make a formal complaint in a criminal Court. Nathu Mal then went to Ghaziabad and filed a civil suit in the Court of the Munsif on the 5 or 6 of February 1925 for a declaration that the pro-note dated the 25 of January 1925, was without consideration.

(3.) Narain Das contested the suit on the ground that he had money dealings with Nathu Mal for a long time, and that the pro-note was for a consideration, and that there was no contract for sale as alleged by Nathu Mal, and that he being a co- sharer in the village could not be afraid of pre-emption, and therefore there was no occasion to get an inflated price entered in the sale-deed. He stated that about 1 years prior to the institution of the civil suit one of his servants had filed a complaint against one Dwarka Das, son-in-law of Nathu Mal, and Dwarka Das was convicted in that case by the trial Court but the case was compromised in the appellate Court, and Narain Das's case was that Dwarka Das thought that Narain Das was really at the bottom of that case, and it was he (Dwarka Das) who pursuaded Nathu Mal to concoct the story that the pro-note was without consideration. The civil suit was tried by Mr. Kidar Nath, Munsif. He disbelieved the statements of Narain Das and of Chuttan Lal and ot Nand Kishore who stated that the pro-note was for consideration, and overruled the pleas urged in defence, and passed a decree in favour of Nathu Mal in terms of the reliefs prayed for in the plaint on the 2nd of June 1925. Narain Das filed an appeal against the decree in the Court of the District Judge. Daring the pendency of the appeal the parties agreed to refer the dispute between them to the arbitration of one Bhaktawar Singh. The arbitrator gave an award in favour of Nathu Mal on the 25 of February 1926. Narain Das filed objections to the award on the 9 of March 1926, but those objections were dismissed for default on the 27 of March 1926. On the 22nd of April. 1926 Narain Das applied for setting aside the order of dismissal for default, and during the pendency of this application the parties agreed to abide by the oath of one Umrao Singh. On the 7 of June 1926 Umrao Singh made a statement on oath to the effect that the pro-note was not for consideration. Because of the statement of Umrao Singh the application for restoration was dismissed on the 7 of June 1926.