L AMIN CHAND Vs. FIRM MADHO RAM BANWARI LAL
HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
FIRM MADHO RAM BANWARI LAL
Click here to view full judgement.
(1.) The appellant before us, Amin Chand, instituted a suit in the Court at Moga against the firm Madho Ram-Banwari Lal and its five partners, Banwari Lal, Ram Parshad, Chanan Ram. Siri Ram and Bholu Ram, for the recovery of Rs. 41,040/on the allegation that the firm through Banwari Lal defendant borrowed Rs. 36,000/- from the plaintiff on the 3rd of July 1945 and Banwari Lal executed the hundi P. I on behalf of the firm undertaking to repay the sum of Rs. 36,000/- after 300 days. The suit was instituted on the 1st of December 1948 claiming the recovery of Rs. 36,000/- as principal and Rs. 5,040/- by way of penalty as interest according to the rate customary In the 'mandis' of Moga and Kot Kapura.
(2.) A written statement was filed by Banwari Lal defendant on behalf of himself and the firm admitting liability, but the suit was contested by the other defendants, who denied liability on the ground that the 'hundi' was without consideration and that its execution was a collusive transaction between Banwari Lal and the plaintiff. It was in fact alleged that Banwari Lal had severed his business connections with the other defendants on the 27th of September 1945 when accounts had been settled between them, and that he had executed the 'hundi' sometime thereafter. The preliminary plea was also raised that the 'hundi' in suit was Inadmissible in evidence and no action could be taken upon it as it was not do stamped.
(3.) The lower Court framed eleven issues the pleadings of the parties, who led evidence thereon, but the suit has been dismissed with(sic) going into the merits at all on the finding th(sic) the 'hundi' was not properly stamped, a belated application by the plaintiff filed after the cash was otherwise finished for obtaining a validations certificate from the Collector under Rule 18 of the Indian stamp Rules being rejected.;
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.