PARAMJEET SINGH, J. - (1.) FOR the reasons indicated in the Civil Misc. application, the same is allowed. Delay of 86 days in filing the appeal is condoned.
(2.) THIS second appeal arises from a suit for recovery of Rs.70,950/ - including interest filed by the appellant -plaintiff which was decreed by the Court of first instance and appeal preferred by the respondents -defendants has been accepted by the learned lower appellate Court and judgment of the Court of first instance has been reversed. The detailed facts are already recapitulated in the judgments of the Courts below and are not required to be reproduced. However, the brief facts relevant for disposal of this second appeal are that appellant - plaintiff filed a suit for recovery alleging that the defendants approached the plaintiff in the month of July 1999 for grant of loan of Rs.50,000/ - and offered to repay the same along with interest on demand. The plaintiff advanced the loan to the defendants in the presence of Jarnail Singh and Kulwant Singh. The amount was received by the defendants in cash. In lieu of that, the defendants executed a receipt dated 10.07.1999 and undertook to repay the loan with interest at the rate of 2% per month within a period of one year. The defendants neither paid the interest nor paid the principal amount despite repeated reminders and they willfully failed to do so, as a result of which, the suit was filed and the plaintiff claimed Rs.50,000/ - along with interest @ 2% per month and also prayed that defendants be held jointly and severally liable to pay the amount i.e. principal as well as interest accrued thereon.
(3.) UPON notice, defendants appeared and filed written statement and took preliminary objections that suit is not maintainable; plaintiff has no cause of action and locus standi to file the suit. They, inter -alia, contended that defendants never received any loan of Rs.50,000/ -. In fact, the defendants were members of the Committee run by Jarnail Singh in the name of his wife Gurdeep Kaur. The said transactions were benami as Jarnail Singh was a Government employee. The plaintiff is the real brother of Jarnail Singh. It is averred that brother of Jarnail Singh had forged the signatures of the defendants and had prepared a fabricated receipt. Since no loan was taken, the question of demand does not arise, they are not liable to pay the amount. It is also one of the pleas that Jarnail Singh is living just opposite the house of the defendants and is running business of chit fund/committees and defendant no.2 became member of one of such committees and at the auction in his favour, Jarnail Singh got signatures of defendant no.2 in token of receipt of committee money and signatures of defendant no.1 as guarantor in register maintained by Jarnail Singh.;