The main legal point established in the judgment is that the plaintiff's establishment of the advancement of the loan amount through negotiable instruments led to the dismissal of the defendant's appeal.

VIPIN SANGHI, J.

1. The present second appeal is directed against the judgment rendered by the learned ADJ-II (Central) Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi in RCA No.02/2014, whereby the first appeal preferred by the appellant/defendant in the suit to assail the judgment rendered by the learned Civil Judge in CS No.61A/2013 filed by the respondent/plaintiff to seek recovery has been dismissed, and the judgment and decree passed by the Trial Court decreeing the suit of the respondent/plaintiff for Rs.2,40,500/- along with pendentilite and future interest @ 18% p.a. till realisation has been upheld.

2. The facts, in brief, are that the respondent/plaintiff filed a suit for recovery of Rs.2,40,000/- on the ground that he had advanced a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- to the appellant/defendant on friendly terms by three cheques dated 11.05.2005 for Rs.50,000/-; 24.09.2005 for Rs.50,000/-, and; 25.08.2006 for Rs.1,00,000/-. The plaintiff claimed that the assurance given by the defendant was that the said amount would be returned alongwith interest @ 18% p.a., but the defendant failed to liquidate the outstanding amount and avoided its liability on one pretext or the other.

3. The plaintiff issued a legal notice dated 23.02.2007 to the defendant demanding the outstanding amount. The said legal notice was responded to by the appellant/defendant by setting up a defence that, in fact, it was the plaintiff who was in need of a loan to save his business; he had asked the appellant/defendant to arrange for a sum of Rs.9,00,000/- as a friendly loan; that the appellant/defendant had advanced a sum of Rs.6,20,000/- to the respondent/plaintiff in instalment on different occasions, i.e. Rs.3,25,000/- on 01.04.2004; Rs.50,000/- on 06.04.2004; Rs.30,000/- on 14.04.2004; Rs.1,00,000/- on 02.06.2004; Rs.65,000/- on 02.11.2004 and Rs.50,000/- on 11.12.2004; the said amount had been given in cash; the plaintiff had put his signatures on some documents pertaining to the said loan amount, which the appellant claimed would be produced at the appropriate time. The appellant/defendant also claimed that the factum of the loan amount being advanced to the plaintiff was in the knowledge of the entire society, i.e. the relatives and family members.

4. The defendant/appellant urged that the plaintiffs brother-in-laws, namely, one Sanjay Pal and Sandeep, both sons of Sh. Mool Chand Pal, resident of village Dhoom Manikpur, Dadari, Distt. Gautam Budh Nagar were instigating the plaintiff not to return the defendant/appellant the loan amount and they had been threatening the defendant directly or indirectly. The defendant also stated in this reply that on his demand for return of the loan, the plaintiff assured to return the loan within a short period. In May 2005, the plaintiff had drawn two cheques amounting to Rs.50,000/- each from his banker and an assurance was given to return the balance amount within a short span of time, but to no avail. Lastly, in July 2006, the panchayat of customary relatives was organised at the premises of the plaintiff, wherein about 20-25 members/relatives assembled. The matter of issue of loan amounting to Rs.6,20,000/- towards the plaintiff by the defendant was amicably resolved, wherein the plaintiff accepted the taking of loan of Rs.6,20,000/- from the defendant, and thereafter the plaintiff agreed to return the amount of Rs.6,20,000/- in three instalments to the defendant.

5. The defendant further stated that on 20.08.2006, the plaintiff had come to the defendants premises and delivered the cheque dated 25.08.2006 for Rs.1 lakh towards partial return of the loan amount. Thereafter, the defendant demanded the balance amount of Rs.4,20,000/- from the plaintiff but to no avail. The defendant further stated that the plaintiff had promised to return the balance amount of Rs.4,20,000/- by 25.02.2007, but cunningly he had sent three legal notices – one to the appellant/defendant and two members of the panchayat, which was organised in July 2006. Vari