V.P.TYAGI, J. - (1.) THIS is plaintiff's appeal against the judgment and decree of the learned District Judge, Alwar dated 19th January, 1973 dismissing the suit of the plaintiff for the recovery of Rs. 10,840/ - on the basis of a pronote and the receipt executed by the defendant respondents.
(2.) THE case of the plaintiff was that he was a Pujari of a temple situate in between the two villages Jaitpur and Hudia. The defendants borrowed Rs. 8,000/ - from the plaintiff after executing a pronote and a receipt which were scribed by PW 2 Ramavtar. The receipt had the thumb impressions of the two witnesses PW 3 Jagram and PW 4 Ghisa. Since the pronote did not contain the prescribed value of the stamp, therefore it was not found by the court below admissible in evidence. On the basis of the receipt and the oral testimony adduced by the plaintiff, the decree was sought by the appellant but the learned lower Court dismissed the plaintiff's claim disbelieving the statements of the plaintiff and his witnesses. Both the defendants are real brothers. Their defence wa of complete denial. They came out with a plea that the receipt and the pronote were forged documents. Defendant No. 1 however pleaded that the plaintiff bore ill -will against him because his son used to help the persons of Jaitpur with whom the plaintiff had litigation. Defendant No. 2, however, did not assign any reason for putting up this false claim by the plaintiff. The defendants also pleaded alibi on the date of the execution of the pronote and the receipt and stated that they were working in Madhya Pradesh on the day of the execution of the said documents and therefore the documents could not be signed by them.
(3.) THE learned trial Judge did not believe the defendant's plea of alibi. The learned Counsel for the respondents did not press that point before this court also.;