Shobha Rani Sah v. P.S.Verma

PRADEEP NANDRAJOG, J.

J.R.MIDHA, J.

DECEMBER 16, 2008 mm

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Decision: December 16, 2008 + RFA 331/2007 SHOBHA RANI SAH ..... Appellant Through: Mr. S.K.Sharma, Adv. with Mr. Dhruv Kumra, Advocate versus P.S.VERMA ..... Respondent Through: Respondent in person CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP NANDRAJOG HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE J.R.MIDHA 1. Whether Reporters of Local papers may be allowed to see the Judgment? 2. To be referred to the Reporter or not? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? Pradeep Nandrajog, J. (Oral) 1. Heard learned counsel for the appellant and the respondent who appears in person. 2. We note that the respondent is a banker having retired as Deputy Manager from the Chandni Chowk Branch of the State Bank of India and understands the commercial laws. 3. The appellant was the defendant. The respondent was the plaintiff. 4. Suit was filed on the allegation that on various dates between September 2000 till April 2001 the plaintiff advanced loan aggregating Rs.3,80,000/- (Rupees Three Lacs and Eighty Thousand only) to the defendant and it was agreed that the same shall carry interest @ 2% per month. It was pleaded that interest till June 2001 was paid by the defendant and from the month of July 2001 none was paid. It was stated that to clear the outstanding loan and interest which had accrued thereon till the month of November 2001, the defendant issued a cheque to the plaintiff bearing No.486047 dated 30.11.2001 in sum of Rs.4,25,000/- (Rupees Four Lacs and Twenty Five Thousand only). The cheque was stated to be drawn on Jai Laxmi Cooperative Bank Ltd., Fateh Puri. It was pleaded that when presented for encashment the cheque was returned with the remark "account closed". Suit was filed seeking recovery of Rs.4,25,000/- (Rupees Four Lacs and Twenty Five Thousand only) and pre-suit interest in sum of Rs.1,50,000/- (Rupees One Lac and Fifty Thousand only). Total value of the suit was Rs.5,75,000/- (Rupees Five Lacs and Seventy Five Thousand only). 5. Defence taken was that no loan was ever taken and no interest was ever paid. The cheque was explained as without consideration. It was pleaded that the late husband of the defendant was having an account with State Bank of India, Chandni Chowk Branch and that in said connection the husband of the defendant came into contact with the plaintiff who was working as a manager in the Chandni Chowk Branch of State Bank of India. It was stated that the husband of the defendant was in business and as per the dictates of her husband the defendant would sign blank cheques from her account maintained with the Jai Laxmi Cooperative Bank and would hand over the same to her husband for being utilized by him during course of his business. It was pleaded that the plaintiff appears to have got hold of the cheque in question which was signed blank and after filling up the same has presented the same for encashment. It was further pleaded in the written statement that after the unfortunate demise of the husband of the defendant on 22.9.2001, the plaintiff started visiting the residence of the defendant and started sympathizing her and desired intimate relations with her. She was tempted with money to overcome the difficulties in the life of a widow. The defendant pleaded that she declined to have relations with the plaintiff and that the suit was filed as a pressure tactic; intention being to some how or the other pressurise the defendant to scumb to the oblique desires of the plaintiff. 6. On the pleadings of the parties, it is apparent that the main issue which was debated before the learned Trial Judge was whether the cheque in question on which the suit was founded was issued by the defendant towards return of the loan and interest for the months of July 2001 till November 2001. 7. The plaintiff examined himself as his witness and proved Ex.PW-1/1 a legal notice dated 16.10.2004 posted at 2 addresses of the defendant. Posting receipts pertaining to the notices being dispatched un