K. SREEDHAR RAO, J.

( 1 ) THIS is defendant's appeal against the judgment and decree passed in O. S. No. 7338/94 on the file of XXX Additional City Civil Judge, Bangalore.

( 2 ) THE appeal although is at admission stage at the request of parties, taken up for final hearing. The necessary certified copy of depositions and documents are furnished by the plaintiff and the defendant for the benefit of perusal.

( 3 ) THE respondent in appeal as a plaintiff filed the suit for recovery of a sum of Rs. 1,73,275/- with costs and interest. It is the case of the plaintiff that during the period 1-8-1990 to 5-3-1991 a sum of Rs. 1,19,500/- was paid. On several occasions it was paid by cash and one occasion by cheque for a sum of Rs. 40,000/- towards hand loan. When the hand loans were given there was no liability on the part of the defendant-appellant to pay interest. On 15-12-1991 it is said that the appellant acknowledged the liability in a sum of Rs. 1,19,500/- marked at Ex. P. 1 and also issued three cheques on 15-12-1991 for a sum of Rs. 45,000/-, on 30-5-1992 for a sum of Rs. 40,000/- and on 10-6-1992 for a sum of Rs. 34,500/ -. The cheques came to be dishonoured, proceedings were instituted u/s. 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act in C. C. No. 4835/92, 4836/92 and 4837/92 on the file of II A. C. M. M. , Bangalore. In the criminal cases, the appellant/defendant was acquitted by the order of this Court. However, it was observed that the observations made in the judgment would not affect the rights of the plaintiff to pursue his remedies before a Civil Court where the present civil suit was pending and the Civil Court was given liberty to decide the matter based on the material adduced independently without being influenced by the observations made in the criminal appeal. The plaintiff has claimed interest at the rate of 18% from the date of dishonour of cheque till the date of filing of the suit and also claim interest at the same rate from the date of suit till realisation.

( 4 ) THE appellant in the written statement has taken up a stand of total denial and in evidence explained that the cheque is issued by the plaintiff towards the material supplied. Ex. P. 1 the acknowledgment is denied. The Bank Manager is summoned. The specimen signatures of the defendant are produced at Exs. P6 and P. 7 for comparison with the signatures in Ex. P. 1 and Exs. P. 2 to P. 4 the signatures on the dishonoured cheques.

( 5 ) THE trial Court on the consideration of oral and documentary evidence, upheld the claim of the plaintiff and also held that the acknowledgment Ex. P. 1 is in the handwriting of the defendant so also the cheques are also held to be issued by the defendant. In view of the dishonour and the proof of liability, decreed the suit, granting interest at the rate of 18% p. a. as claimed till the date of suit and subsequently 6% interest is granted from the date of suit till realisation. Aggrieved by the judgment and decree, the present appeal is filed.

( 6 ) THE appellant in this appeal raised the following two questions to challenge the judgment and decree. Firstly contends that admittedly prior to issuance of cheque, there was a transaction of a hand loan which constitutes one and only cause of action. The cheque issued does not confer any independent cause of action on its own to institute the suit. Cheques issued also do not constitute an acknowledgment u/s. 19 of the Limitation Act. The claim of the plaintiff from the date of cause of action i. e. between the periods 1-8-1990 to 5-3-1991, is barred by limitation as the suit is filed on 13-12-1994.

( 7 ) SECONDLY contends that the plaint averments explicitly indicate that there was no contract to pay interest. Therefore, the provisions of S. 80 of the Negotiable Instruments Act can have no application to the facts of the case and that plaintiff is not entitled to any interest from the date of original cause of action till the date notice i. e. 18-10-1991 and granting interest for the sa

Click Here to Read the rest of this document