1981 Supreme(MP) 367

P. D. Mulye, J.
Gopaldas v. Puran
C. Revn. No. 880 of 1978 (I); Decided on 6-7-1981

Headnote:Small Cause Courts Act, 1887-- S. 25 -- revision under -- interference when not called for-- suit dismissed of appreciation of evidence -- no question of law involved --Interference not called for.

        This revision filed by the plaintiff under S. 25 of the Provincial Small Cause Court Act is directed against the judgment and decree dated 14-9-78 passed by the Second Additional District Judge, Ratlam, exercising powers of Small Cause Court in small cause suit No. 47 of 78, dismissing the plaintiffs suit for Rs. 554/- based on a promissory note.

        Held: The learned counsel for the applicant contended that the learned trial Court has committed an error in dismissing the plaintiffs suit especially when the defendants have admitted their signature on the said promissory note Ex. P-1. However, the plaintiff has admitted that he is a money lender, but apart from the promissory note he has not filed any documentary evidence to prove that in fact on the said date he had advanced a sum of Rs. 400/- to the defendants.

        In this case the plaintiff alone has been examined as also the defendants. Thus there is oath against oath and the decision of the case entirely rest on questions of fact. Apparently no question of law is involved and I do not find any valid ground to interfere with the finding recorded by the learned trial Court in absence of any perversity or legal infirmity. Consequently this revision petition is dismissed.