Judgment:- ‘The second appeal arises out of O.S.No.l54 of 1966 which is a suit for recovery of Rs.4094-90. The case of the plaintiff is that on the morning of 24th April, 1964, the defendant took a hand-loan of Rs.3,500 from the plaintiff for family expenses agreeing to repay with interest at 9 per cent. per annum and on that very day in the evening he executed a stamped receipt in token of having received this amount. Therefore, the suit is filed on the original debt, the receipt even if it be a promissory note, “being insufficiently stamped.

2. In the written statement the defendant contended that he never executed any receipt nor d,id he borrow any hand-loan at all. His further case was that the plaintiff requested the defendant to sell one of his cows and thereupon it was sold for Rs.220/-, that purporting to be a receipt for the payment of the said sum of Rs.220/- the suit promissory note has” been taken from him stealthily and that in any event the suit document is inadmissible in evidence as not being duly stamped and that the suit based on the original cause of action is not maintainable. The trial Court dismissed the suit holding that the suit promissory note was insufficie

Click Here to Read the rest of this document