ANUP LAL MAHTO Vs. MAHESH JHA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is an application in revision on behalf of the defendant in a suit brought upon the basis of a hand-note dated July 25 1933. The hand-note is for a sum of Rs. 125 and carries interest at the rate of Re. 1-4-0 per cent. per mensem. The hand-note was inadmissible in evidence because it was not duly stamped. It bore postage stamp instead of revenue stamp. But the learned Munsif nevertheless allowed oral evidence to be given on the basis of his view that the suit could be converted into a suit on the original loan. In this view the learned Munsif was correct. It is unnecessary to cite the large number of authorities which have clustered round this point. The learned Munsif, however, has awarded interest at the rate of 1 per cent. per mensem "by way of compensation. In this he was in error. Unless the contract for interest is established interest by way of compensation cannot be allowed : see J. H. Pattinson V/s. Bindhya Debi 12 Pat 216 : 146 Ind Cas. 56 : AIR 1933 : Pat 196 : 14 PLT 149 : 6 RP 225.

(2.) IN the present case, the basis of the contract was the hand-note and the hand-note being found inadmissible in evidence it cannot be used for any purpose (except a collateral purpose) e.g. to determine the rate of interest payable on this loan. The result is that unless the plaintiff can invoke the aid of the INterest Act, be cannot get any relief by way of interest. Therefore the claim for interest up to the date of the suit is disallowed. The plaintiff, however, must be taken to have made a demand before filing the plaint. The written statement was filed on August ]3, ]936. It may, therefore, be safely taken that the demand was communicated on August 1. 1936. I therefore direct that interest will run on the original sum of Rs. 125 at 1 per cent. per mensem from August ], 1936, till the date of the decree and thereafter at 6 per cent. per annum with this modification, the application is rejected. IN the circumstances, there will be no order for costs in this Court.