Judgment

SINHA, C.J.I. : The substantial question for determination in this appeal is whether or not the two hundis sued upon were admissible in evidence. The learned Trial Judge held that they were, and in that view of the matter decreed the suit in full with costs and future interest, by his judgment and decree dated September 26, 1952. On appeal, the High Court of Rajasthan at Jodhpur, by its judgment and decree dated October 8, 1956* allowed the appeal and dismissed the plaintiffs suit. Each party was directed to bear its own costs throughout. The High Court granted the necessary certificate under Art. 133(1)(a) of the Constitution. That is how the appeal is before us.

* (See AIR 1957 Raj 47-Ed.)

2. It is only necessary to state the following facts in order to appreciate the question of law that has to be determined in this appeal. The defendant-responmdent is said to have owed money to the plaintiffs, the appellants in this case, during the course of their business as commission agents for the defendant, at Bombay. Towards the payment of those dues, the defendant drew two mudatti hundis in favouor of the plaintiffs, for the sum of 35 thousand rupees, one for 20 thousand rupees p