Law:

Section:

(a) Negotiable Instruments Act (XXVI of 1881)------5. 118---Presumption as to negotiable instrument---Presumption in terms of S.118, Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, was of due execution of a negotiable instrument for valuable consideration and that every such instrument was accepted, endorsed, negotiated or transferred for consideration---Presumption of law, which was rebuttable, was that negotiable instrument was made or drawn on such date which was duly recorded on such instrument. (b) Law Reforms Ordinance (III of 1972)--- ----S. 3---Intra-Court appeal---Single Judge of High Court did not take material circumstances and evidence into consideration in its proper perspective and took an erroneous view of evidence which could not be upheld---Judgment of Single Judge of High Court which did not conform to settled principles of appreciation of evidence, could not be sustained--­Judgment and decree passed by Single Judge of High Court was set aside in Intra-Court Appeal. JUDGMENT RANA BHAGWAN DAS, J.--- This appeal is directed against the judgment and decree, dated 10-2-1987 passed by the learned Single. Judge in Suit No. 135 of 1984, dismissing a suit for recovery of Rs.2,40,000 filed under Order XXXVII, C.P.C. 2. Briefly stated case of the appellant is that he had sold his poultry farm to the respondents by a registered sale-deed for Rs.20,00,000. Since respondents were short of funds, they requested the appellant for friendly loan of Rs.24,000 which was advanced as desired by the respondents in order to meet the overhead expenses. Respondents executed a promissory note and a receipt both, dated 1-2-1982 acknowledging the receipt of this amount and promising to pay the same on demand. Appellant demanded the return of the amount advanced by him but the respondents refused to pay back the same on one or other pretext. Later on after sending a legal notice of demand and finding no response he brought the suit. 3. Respondents contested the suit and filed a written statement admitting the purchase of poultry farm from the appellant for Rs.20,00,000 but denying whether they were short of funds or that they asked for a friendly loan of Rs.2,40,000. Their case in the…

Deprecated: trim(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 492