KEYARSOSP Vs. GARBAD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) SUBHEDAR , A.J.C. 1. This is plaintiff's appeal. The plaintiff had brought the suit out of which this second appeal arises to recover from the defendant Rs. 500 for principal and Rs. 180 interest due upon a loan of Rs. 500 taken by the defendant on 30th September 1922 repayable on 31st December 1922 by delivery of cotton or cash. The defendant admitted the loan but stated that he took it from one Jairam who was at that time in plaintiff's service and that he had discharged the debt by delivering to Jairam the requisite quantity of cotton in two installments on 28th November 1922 and 2nd December 1922.

(2.) THE three main issues upon the pleadings of the parties which were settled for trial were these:

(3.) THE plaintiff has, therefore, filed the present appeal and it is contended on his behalf that the finding of the lower appellate Court on the second issue being based upon inadmissible and false evidence was not a legal finding binding upon the appellant in second appeal, and that therefore, the trial Court's finding that the alleged repayments were not proved should be restored. The attack was made with reference to the admissibility of Ex. D-1 only and it was urged that since it was not admittedly a regularly kept book of account, it could not be used in evidence. The learned District Judge has, however, clearly called it memoranda kept by the witness Jairam and surely it could thus be used in evidence not by itself but as corroborating Jairam or refreshing his memory: see observations at p. 47 in Mukundram v. Dayaram [1914] 10 N.L.R. 44.