Skip to content

Jadu Mondal and ors. Vs. Jagendranath Banerjee - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
Decided On
Reported inAIR1923Cal319(1),68Ind.Cas.303
AppellantJadu Mondal and ors.
RespondentJagendranath Banerjee
bond - execution, denial of--execution established--court, if may infer passing of consideration. - .....discharge this rule with costs. hearing fee one gold.....

1. The petitioners were the defendants in a suit for money brought on a bond. The suit was decreed. This Rule was granted on the ground that there was no evidence whatever before the Court with regard to the passing of the consideration in respect of which the bond is alleged to have been given.

2. From the record of the substance of the evidence it is true that no witness is shown to have stated that the consideration of the bond was paid. But the issue having been tried under the Small Cause Court Procedure it does not follow that because no such statement was recorded no such statement was made. Further, the defendants denied execution of the bond at all. The lower Court has found that defence to be false and having found that the defendants executed the bond and as bond contains a recital that the money was paid, no error in law would be committed if from those facts the lower Court concluded, as it has done, that the consideration was paid.

3. We see no sufficient ground for disturbing the decision of the Small Cause Court Judge and accordingly discharge this Rule with costs. Hearing fee one gold mohur.

Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //