IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS Dated : 22.11.2023 CORAM :

THE HONOURABLE Mr. JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN S.A.Nos.603 and 604 of 2010 and M.P.Nos.1,1 of 2010 Sri Shanthi General Finance, rep. by its Managing Partner, S.Swaminathan, No.171, Lal Bahadur Shastri Street, Pondicherry. .. Appellant in both second appeals Vs.

1.V.Arumugam, ..First and second respondent in both second appeals respectively

2.V.Sandiny. ..Second and first respondent in both second appeals respectively Common Prayer: Second Appeals filed under Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure, against the judgment and decree dated 17.11.2009 passed in A.S.Nos.268 and 292 of 2006, respectively on the file of the Pricipal District Judge, Puducherry, reversing the judgment and decree dated 31.12.2003 in O.S.No.4 of 2000 on the file of the Additional Sub Judge, Puducherry.

For Appellant in both second appeals : Mr.Sai Srujan Jayi For Respondents For R1/R2 : M/s.R.Ramya for Mr.T.V.Krishnamachari.

For R2/R1 : Mr.T.M.Naveen for Mr.T.P.Manoharan.

****

C O M M O N J U D G M E N T

Both these Second Appeals have been filed at the instance of the plaintiff.

2. The parties will be referred to according to their litigative status as before the Trial Court.

3. Originally, the suit was filed by the plaintiff/finance against two defendants viz., V.Arumugam and V.Sandiny. Wherein, the Trial Court decreed the suit. Against which, both the defendants filed two separate appeals. The first defendant/V.Arumugam has filed appeal in A.S.No.268 of 2006, and the second defendant/V.Sandiny has filed another appeal in A.S.No.292 of 2006. Both the appeals were heard together and a common judgment was passed. Against the common judgment, the plaintiff has filed two separate second appeals in S.A.Nos.603 & 604 of 2010. In S.A.No.603 of 2010, the first defendant was arrayed as first respondent and in S.A.No.604 of 2010, the first defendant was arrayed as second respondent. Since both the second appeals are arising out of the same suit and common judgment of the Lower Appellate Court, both the second appeals taken together for disposal.

The brief facts which give rise to the instant Second Appeals are that:

4. The defendants borrowed a sum of Rs.1,50,000/- for their business purpose from the plaintiff. In evidence thereof, they had executed a promissory note on 25.04.1996, and agreed to pay the principal amount with interest at the rate of 24% p.a. Since the defendants have not chosen to pay either the interest or the principal, the plaintiff issued a legal notice to the defendants on 13.10.1997. The defendants, though received the notice, did not choose to repay the amount. However, the second defendant issued a reply on 24.11.1997. In the reply, though she admitted the joint liability, denied the quantum. The plaintiff further submits that subsequently, on 27.01.1998, the defendants approached the plaintiff in person and requested to waive the interest component. Further, the defendants acknowledged their debt and promised in writing to pay the borrowed amount within six months. Since the defendants have acknowledged their debt on 27.01.1998, the suit is within the period of limitation. Hence, the plaintiff prayed to decree the suit.

5. Resisting the above contention, the first defendant has filed a written statement contending that he did not borrow any amount and he has also disputed the execution of the promissory note. The first defendant also disputed the reply issued by the second defendant. Similarly, this defendant disputed the alleged acknowledgment of the debt, dated 27.01.1998. Hence, he prayed to dismiss the suit.

6. The second defendant filed a separate written statement by disputing the letter of acknowledgment dated 27.01.1998 and contented that the same is a fabricated one. This defendant further submits that the suit is hopelessly barred by limitation. This defendant further submits that there is no borrowal of Rs.1,50,000/- from the plaintiff/finance and has disputed the execution o