The proof of the document need not be the proof of its contents, and the failure to question the validity of a document in a timely manner can impact the outcome of a legal dispute.

1. This appeal has been arising out of the judgment and decree in O.S.No.27 of 2006, dated 28.09.2007 on the file of the learned Additional District Judge, Puducherry at Karaikal.

2. The averments made in the plaint in O.S.No.27 of 2006 are as follows:-

The defendant is the owner of the suit property. She borrowed a sum of Rs.2,00,000/-from the plaintiff and executed a simple mortgage deed on 24.07.2002, which was duly executed, attested and registered. The defendant has undertook to repay the same with interest at the rate of 12% per annum. On 25.07.2003, the defendant made a part payment of Rs.40,000/- towards principal and interest and a receipt was also issued by the plaintiff for the same. Except this amount, the defendant has not paid any other amount. In spite of various demands, the defendant has failed to repay the balance amount and discharged the mortgage. Hence, the plaintiff issued a legal notice on 13.05.2004 calling upon the defendant to repay the balance amount. The defendant received the said notice on 15.05.2004, but she neither sent a reply, nor repaid the balance amount. Hence, the plaintiff is constrained to file the suit for recovery of money due on mortgage deed and prayed for a decree.

3. The gist and essence of the written statement filed by the defendant is as follows:-

(i) During the beginning of second half of the year 2000, the defendant and her husband viz., Mr.Meidin Abdul Kader were badly in need of Rs.40,000/- for the admission of their son Mr.Jamaldeen in a private Engineering College at Trichy for B.E. (EEE) Course. At that time, one Mr.Balaraman, French Teacher Street, Karaikal, came forward to lend money to the defendant for a monthly interest of 3%. The said Mr.Balaraman is a Financier and he represented to the defendant and her husband that he would arrange funds from prospective creditors, if they could offer their immovable property as collateral security for the proposed loan. Since the defendant was in dire need of the money, she handed over the Xerox copy of a title deed. The said Mr.Balaraman had kept prepared the sale agreement purporting to be an agreement of the sale of the defendant's lands at Subarayapuram to one Abdul Azees. When the defendant and her husband made an enquiry, the said Mr.Balaraman informed them that it is the practice of indigenous money lenders to get an agreement of sale from the borrower for a higher amount and that the agreement of sale was meant only as a security. A sale agreement was executed on 15.07.2000 as if the defendant has agreed to sell her properties for Rs.1,25,000/- and that she had received an advance of Rs.1,00,000/- from Abdul Azees. But the said Mr.Balaraman gave a sum of Rs.38,750/- to the defendant stating that he has deducted a sum of Rs.1,250/- towards advance interest for one month. Even in the year 2000, the Government Guideline rate of the properties covered in the sale agreement dated 15.07.2000 was Rs.3,00,000/-. For one year, the defendant had, through her husband, paid interest at Rs.1,250/- per month to Balaraman. It is only at that juncture, the aforementioned Abdul Azees viz., the plaintiff came to the house of of the defendant and told her that not to pay interest to Mr.Balaraman and to pay the interest directly to him.

(ii) During the 1st week of July 2002, the plaintiff called on the defendant at her residence and told her a shocking news that Mr.Balaraman had availed a loan of Rs.60,000/- from him and as he had neither paid the principal nor paid the interest, he demanded that the defendant must pay the entire sum of Rs.1,00,000/-. The plaintiff also gave a complaint against the defendant to the Superintendent of Police, Karaikal. The defendant's husband went to police station and an enquiry was conducted by the Station House Officer, Karaikal Town Police Station. The Station House Officer has directed the defendant to offer her house property, which is situated at Nehru Nagar, as a security for repayment. Realis