( 1 ) THIS is a revision under Section 25 of the Provincial Small Cause Courts Act from a judgment and decree of the Small Cause Court. Hoshangabad, dismissing the plaintiffs' claim.

( 2 ) THE petitioners' case was that the respondent borrowed from them one Mani of juar and 2 maunds of gram on September 11, 1967 under a receipt (Ex P-l) and promised to return l1/4 quantity of the grain so taken on credit. It is not in dispute that the value of the grain borrowed was Rs. 210/ -. The plaintiffs claimed Rs. 310/- by including Rs. 100/- as damages for breach of the contract for not returning the grain as promised.

( 3 ) THE defence was that the plaintiffs practised fraud on the defendant and obtained his signature on Ex, P-l after compromising a case which had been pending before the Debt Relief Court, The execution of the document was, however, admitted subject to the above contention.

( 4 ) THE learned Judge of the Small Cause Court dismissed the suit with the observation that since a compromise (Ex. P-l) had been executed between the parties on August 25, 1967, it could not be believed that the plaintiff would again advance grain of the value of Rs. 210/-on credit wit