1. - The application filed by the defendant for amending his written statement so as to take a plea that the plaintiff was a money-lender and that he could not carry on the business of money lending without a licence was dismissed by the trial court by its Order dated 22-3-85 on three grounds. The first ground given by the trial court was that the, defendant had denied taking of any loan what so ever. It may be pointed out that even if the defendant denied taking of loan as alleged by the plaintiff yet he can take a plea that the plaintiff could not do the business of money lending without a licence and that the suit was not maintainable in the absence of the production of licence by the plaintiff.

2. Another ground given by the trial court was that the case of the plaintiff in the plaint is that the money was advanced to the defendant for the purpose of his trade and that the advancement of loan to a trader did. not fall within the definition of 'loan' as contained in Section 2(9) of the Rajasthan Money Lenders Act, 1963 However, Clause (j) of Section; 2(9) of the Act provides that loan means an advance at interest, but does not include a loan to a trader except for the pu