Defendants 3 and 4 in O.S.97/91 on the file of the Principal Sub Court, Kochi, are the appellants in this appeal. The said suit instituted by respondents 1 and 2 herein was for realization of a sum of Rs.41,113.75 together with interest at the rate of 15% totaling altogether to Rs.55,112.75.

THE PLAINT AVERMENTS IN BRIEF:

2. The case of the plaintiffs can be summarized as follows:-

The first plaintiff is a Company by name M/s. Leelaram Shevaram (India) Pvt. Ltd. represented by its Manager, the 2nd plaintiff. The first defendant represented by defendants 2 and 5, is a registered partnership firm by name Sri Ram Traders of which defendants 2 to 5 are the partners. On 11-7-1988 the first defendant firm purchased 145 bags of boiled rice at the rate of Rs.440 quintal. The total value of the goods so purchased was Rs.48,113.75 After the purchase of goods, the first defendant firm issued Ext.A3 cheque for the aforesaid amount. When the cheque was presented for encashment before the drawee bank it was dishonoured. Even though the defendants were prosecuted before the Criminal Court it was not successful for the reason that the cheque issued was a post dated cheque. The 2nd and 5th defendants had filed a suit before the Munsiff’s Court, Cochin as O.S. 782/1988 seeking a perpetual injunction restraining the plaintiff herein from initiating any police action. While so, defendants 4 and 5 expressed a desire to settle the matter and clear the liability. The defendants had been requesting for time to discharge the debt. They had paid only a sum of Rs.7,000/-. On 26-9-1988 defendants 4 and 5 executed Ext.A5 promissory note for Rs.48,113/- to the 2nd plaintiff undertaking to pay the said amount. On that day a scooter was entrusted to the 2nd plaintiff requesting her to sell the same and adjust its value towards the outstanding liability. On 5-7-1989 a notice was sent by the plaintiffs calling upon defendants 2 to 5 pay the amounts due and discharge the liability. On receipt of notice defendants 4 and 5 have caused a reply notice to be sent denying their liability. The balance amount due is Rs. 41,113.75 which is payable with 15% interest thereon. Hence the suit.

PLEADING IN DEFENCE

3. Defendants 1, 2 and 5 did not enter appearance and they were set ex parte. The suit was resisted by defendants 3 and 4 who filed a joint written statement contending inter alia as follows-

These defendants are not partners of the first defendant firm. The alleged purchase of rice is also denied. These defendants had no connection or business dealings with the first plaintiff. After 9-9-1987 these defendants have no connection or dealings with the first defendant firm. The complaint alleged by the plaintiff was investigated by the Mattancherry police and tried by the J.F.C.M., Kochi which had acquitted these defendants after trial. These defendants had not met the plaintiff to settle the matter. The execution of Ext.A5 promissory note on 26-9-1988 is denied. The 2nd plaintiff had filed a criminal complaint before the Mattancherry police. Pursuant to the illegal influence exerted by the 2nd plaintiff the 4th defendant was taken to the police station by the Divisional/Circle Inspector of Police, Mattancherry at 12 noon on 26-9-1988. He was detained in the police station till 7 ‘O’ clock in the night. During the said detention the 5th defendant was also brought into the police station. The signatures of defendants 4 and 5 were forcibly obtained under threat, coercion, intimidation, criminal force and all sorts of unlawful means by the Divisional Inspector who thus got Ext.A5 promissory note executed under duress. A scooter belonging to a relative of the 4th defendant was also forcibly taken and handed over to the 2nd plaintiff. On the next day itself these defendants had issued a lawyer notice to the Divisional Inspector of Police and the 2nd plaintiff. To the lawyer notice issued by the plaintiff before the institution of the suit these defendants had sent a