GAURANGA MOHANTY Vs. RADHABALLAV MATH AND ANR.
LAWS(ORI)-1976-4-20
HIGH COURT OF ORISSA
Decided on
April 27,1976
Gauranga Mohanty
Appellant
VERSUS
Radhaballav Math And Anr.
Respondents
Referred Judgements :-
MAHANT SRINIVAS RAMANUJA DAS V. SURYANARAYAN DAS AND ANR. [REFERRED TO]COMMISSIONER HINDU RELIGIOUS ENDOW MENTS MADRAS VS. LAKSHMINDRA THIRTHA SWAMIAR OF SHIRUR MUTT [REFERRED TO]
GOPAL KRISHNAJI KETKAR VS. MOHAMED HAJI LATIF [REFERRED TO]
T S MURUGESAM PILLAI VS. MANICKAVASAKA DESIKA [REFERRED TO]
JUDGEMENT
R.N.Misra, J. -
(1.)THE sole Defendant is in appeal against the decree for recovery of money passed by the learned Additional Subordinate Judge of Puri.
(2.)RADHABALLAV Math Endowment through its Executive Officer filed Money Suit No. 369 of 1965 for recovery of Rs. 8, 160/. on the basis of two promissory notes. According to the plaint story, Defendant borrowed Rs. 2,0001 - on 18 -11 -1962 and again borrowed Rs. 1,000/ - on 2 -12 -1902. Both the loans were supported by promissory notes. Mahant Radhacharan Das who had given the loans died on 19 -3 -1963. As there was a dispute regarding succession, the management of the Math was taken over by the Commissioner of Endowments and an Executive Officer was posted to look after the affairs of the institution. The Mahant had not made any disposition in regard to the suit loans and, therefore, the Math became entitled to recover the dues. Soon after Mahant died, a chaotic condition prevailed for some time and taking advantage of the situation the Defendant got the promissory notes torn and had thrown them away within the Math compound. Defendant was, therefore, prosecuted and the promissory notes were exhibited in the chemical case.
Defendant in his written statement admitted the loans but claimed that they were out of personal funds of the Mahant and, therefore, the Math had no right to sue. The Mahant had left behind a chela by name Krushnachandra Das and if at all, it was he who could recover the money. It was admitted that the loans had been incurred from the Mahant Radhacharan Das but it was pleaded that three days before his death repayments had been made and the Mahant tore away the promissory
(3.)THE learned Trial Judge framed six issues in all, of which Issue No. 3 was regarding Plaintiff's locus standi to maintain the suit; Issue No. 4 was as to whether the suit was hit by the provisions of the Orissa Money -Lenders Act and its Rules and Issue No. 5 was as to whether any amount was due from the Defendant. The learned Trial Judge found that the suit was maintainable and was not hit by the provisions of the Money -Lenders Act and its Rules and that the entire amount as claimed was due from the' Defendant because he had failed to establish repayments,
(2.)RADHABALLAV Math Endowment through its Executive Officer filed Money Suit No. 369 of 1965 for recovery of Rs. 8, 160/. on the basis of two promissory notes. According to the plaint story, Defendant borrowed Rs. 2,0001 - on 18 -11 -1962 and again borrowed Rs. 1,000/ - on 2 -12 -1902. Both the loans were supported by promissory notes. Mahant Radhacharan Das who had given the loans died on 19 -3 -1963. As there was a dispute regarding succession, the management of the Math was taken over by the Commissioner of Endowments and an Executive Officer was posted to look after the affairs of the institution. The Mahant had not made any disposition in regard to the suit loans and, therefore, the Math became entitled to recover the dues. Soon after Mahant died, a chaotic condition prevailed for some time and taking advantage of the situation the Defendant got the promissory notes torn and had thrown them away within the Math compound. Defendant was, therefore, prosecuted and the promissory notes were exhibited in the chemical case.
Defendant in his written statement admitted the loans but claimed that they were out of personal funds of the Mahant and, therefore, the Math had no right to sue. The Mahant had left behind a chela by name Krushnachandra Das and if at all, it was he who could recover the money. It was admitted that the loans had been incurred from the Mahant Radhacharan Das but it was pleaded that three days before his death repayments had been made and the Mahant tore away the promissory
(3.)THE learned Trial Judge framed six issues in all, of which Issue No. 3 was regarding Plaintiff's locus standi to maintain the suit; Issue No. 4 was as to whether the suit was hit by the provisions of the Orissa Money -Lenders Act and its Rules and Issue No. 5 was as to whether any amount was due from the Defendant. The learned Trial Judge found that the suit was maintainable and was not hit by the provisions of the Money -Lenders Act and its Rules and that the entire amount as claimed was due from the' Defendant because he had failed to establish repayments,
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.