1918  Present: Bertram C.J. and Ennis J.

NADARAJA et al. v. RAMALINGAM.

156-JD. C. (Inty.) Jaffna, 12,056.

Evidence Ordinance, s. 92-Statement in deed that sum of Rs. 4,000 was consideration, and that it was paid-Action by vendor for recovering balance consideration, alleging that only Rs. 2,600 was paid- Oral evidence led to prove that actual consideration agreed upon was Rs. 2,500.

In a deed of transfer it was stated that the consideration was a sum of Rs. 4,000, and that it was paid. The vendor, alleging that only Rs. 2,500 was paid, sued the purchaser for the balance.

Held, that it was open to the purchaser to prove that the con­sideration for the transfer was Rs. 2,500 and not Rs. 4,000.

" The plaintiff comes into Court repudiating a statement with regard to the payment of the consideration, and if he is allowed to put that forward, he ought also to suffer the person whom he attacks to show the real nature of the transaction."

THE plaintiffs-appellants sued the defendant-respondent for the  payment of a sum of Rs. 1,890, being the amount of balance sum and interest due from the defendant-respondent to the plaintiffs-appellants on account of the transfer of a piece of land by them to the defendant-respondent.

The   defendant-respondent  filed  answer  denying  that   any  sum  of money was   due from him to   the plaintiffs-appellants,   and stated  that the actual consideration agreed upon was Rs. 2,500,  and not    Ramalingam Rs. 4,000 as recited in the transfer deed P    1. The following issues were framed: -

 
                 (a)   Is it open to the defendant to urge that the real consideration was not the sum mentioned  in the transfer,  but another amount?

                  (b)  If   it   is,   what   was   the   consideration   agreed   upon   by   the parties?

The District Judge (Dr. P. E. Pieris) answered the first issue in the affirmative, and held that the consideration which the defendant agreed to pay was Rs. 2,500.

The plaintiffs appealed.

The deed in question was as follows: -

P 1.

 Transfer No. 436.

To all to whom these presents shall come:

Nagamuttar Nadarasar and wife Nagaratnam, both of
Vaddukkoddai West:

Send Greeting.

Whereas under and by virtue of a dowry deed dated December 10, 1907, and attested by, &&., under No. 6,822, the said Nagamuttar Nadarasar and wife Nagaratnam are seized and possessed of a piece of land called Mullaikkaddaiady, in extent 10 lachams varaku culture, with house, well, and other appurtenances, situated at Vannarponnai West, and more fully described in the schedule:

And whereas the said Nagamuttar Nadarasar and wife Nagaratnam have agreed for the absolute sale and assignment to Mangapperumal Sinnathamby Ramalingam of Vannarponnai West of the said premises intended to be hereby granted and conveyed free from encumbrances at the price or sum of Rs. 4,000:

Now know ye, and these presents witness, that the said Nagamuttar Nadarasar and wife Nagaratnam, both of Vaddukkoddai West, in pursuance of the said agreement, and in consideration of the sum of Rs. 4,000 paid by the said Mangapperumal Sinnatamby Ramalingam of Vannarponnai West (the receipt whereof, &c), do hereby grant, convey, assign, transfer, set over, and assure unto the said Mangapperumal Sinnatamby Ramalingam, his heirs, &c, the said piece of land called Mullaikkaddaiady, in extent 10 lachams varaku culture, with house, well, and other appurtenances, situated at "Vannarponnai West, more particularly described and set forth in the schedule to these presents, together with all buildings, privileges, easements, and other appurtenances whatsoever to the said premises belonging, or in anywise appertaining or usually held or enjoyed therewith or reputed to belong or be appurtenant thereto, and all the estate, right, title, &c.

Signed, witnessed, and attested June 3, 1914.

Hayley and J.  Joseph, for the appellants.

A. St. V. Jayawardene