O.P. Saxena, J. - (1.) THIS is an appeal against the judgment and decree dated 16th May, 1977 passed by the Civil Judge, Etah dismissing a suit for recovery of Rs. 22,280.50 with pendentelite and future interest and costs.
(2.) THE undisputed facts are that the parties are residents of Ganjdundwara, District Etah. The Plaintiff is a lecturer in Ganjdundwara Degree College. Defendants 2 to 5 Om Prakash Vijai, Babu Ram Vijai, Sita Ram Vijai and Jagdish Prasad Vijai are partners of Defendant No. 1 Firm M/s. Seth Murlidhar Ram Chandra Vijai. Defendant No. 2 Om Prakash Vijai is the son of Defendant No. 3 Babu Ram Vijai. Defendant No. 3 Babu Ram Vijai is the Vice President of the Managing Committee of Ganjdundwara Degree College in which the Plaintiff is employed as a lecturer. On 3 -9 -70 a sum of Rs. 14,000/ - and on 17 -9 -70 a sum of Rs. 1,000/ -was paid by the Plaintiff to the Defendants. Plaintiff filed the suit for recovery of Rs. 22,280.50 with pendentelite and future interest and costs with the allegations that on 3 -9 -70 Defendants borrowed Rs. 14,000/ - from him and agreed to pay interest at the rate of Rs. 1.50 per hundred per mensem, that Defendant No. 2 Om Prakash Vijai also gave a writing in this connection, that on 17 -9 -70 the Defendants again borrowed Rs. 1,000/ -from the Plaintiff, that Defendant No. 2 acknowledged the receipt of the amount on the earlier writing, that a sum of Rs. 15,000/ - was due on the Defendants as the principal amount and a sum of Rs. 7,280.50 was due as interest upto the date of suit and that the Defendants have failed to pay the amount inspite of demand made by a notice sent by registered post.
(3.) THE suit was contested by the Defendants with the allegations that they did not borrow any money from the Plaintiff, that the Plaintiff deposited Rs. 14,000/ -with the Defendants on 8 -9 -70 and Rs. 1,000/ - on 17 -9 -70, that the Plaintiff assured the Defendants that it was white money, that the Defendants called upon the Plaintiff to furnish proof of the money being white, that the Defendants told the Plaintiff that they would keep the money in deposit only on being satisfied that it was white money, that the Plaintiff failed to furnish satisfactory proof of this, that on 29 -9 -1970 the Defendants returned Rs. 15,000/ - to the Plaintiff, that Defendant No. 2 Babu Ram Vijai was not present at the time the money was returned, that it was for this reason that the parcha was not demanded back, that on coming to know that the Plaintiff had obtained the parcha from Defendant No. 2, the Defendants asked them to return the parcha but the Plaintiff put off the matter on the pretext that it was not available, that the Plaintiff is not entitled to interest and that the Plaintiff has filed the suit with false allegations.;