IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARUN-UL-RASHID WEDNESDAY, THE 27TH MAY 2009 / 6TH JYAISHTA 1931 RSA.No. 407 of 2009() --------------------- AS.183/2004 of III ADDL. DISTRICT COURT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM OS.134/2002 of SUB COURT,NEYYATTINKARA .................... : APPELLANT ----------------------------- SAJEEV, S/O.LAZARAS, AGED 48 YEARS, S.S.BHAVAN, KOTTAVILLA, PARASALA DESOM, PARASALA VILLAGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.SREEKANTH S.NAIR RESPONDENT(S): PLAINTIFF ------------------------ JUSTIN FRANCIS, S/O.FRANCIS, MAHADEVARVILA VEEDU, AYIRA DESOM, KARODE VILLAGE, NEYYATTINKARA TALUK, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. THIS REGULAR SECOND APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 27/05/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: ORDER IN I.A. NO. 897 OF 2009 IN R.S.A. NO. 407 OF 2009 DISMISSED SD/- HARUN-UL-RASHID, JUDGE 27.05.2009 HARUN-UL-RASHID, J. ---------------------------------------- R.S.A.No.407 of 2009 ---------------------------------------- Dated this the 27th day of May, 2009 JUDGMENT The defendant in O.S. 134/2002 on the file of the Sub Court, Neyyattinkara is the appellant herein. O.S. 134/2002 was filed by the respondent herein as plaintiff for realisation of money. The parties hereinafter referred to as defendant/appellant and plaintiff /respondent as arrayed in the Suit. 2. According to the plaintiff the defendant borrowed from him Rs. 1 lakh on executing Ext.A1 promissory note promising to repay the same with interest as and when demanded. According to him the defendant never paid either the principal amount or the interest thereon. 3. The defendant denied the execution of the promissory note and the alleged transaction .The defendant interalia contended that Ext.A1 was fabricated by the plaintiff with the connivance of PWs 2 and 3 and on the basis of the said fabricated document the present suit was filed advancing a false claim. 4. The trial court examined 3 witnesses including the plaintiff and marked Ext.A1 to A4 on the side of the plaintiff The defendant was examined as DW1 . He has not adduced any supporting evidence either oral or documentary to prove his contentions. The trial court held that Ext.A1 was executed by the defendant while receiving Rs. 1 lakh from R.S.A. No. 407 of 2009 -2- the plaintiff as a loan. The trial court also fully satisfied that the evidence of PW1 as regards execution of Ext.A1 and the alleged transaction involving Rs. 1 lakh being lent to the defendant stands fully corroborated by the evidence of PWs 2 and 3. The trial court considered the oral evidence tendered by PW2 to the effect that the transaction took place at the office of PW3 and Ext.A1 was signed by the defendant while receiving Rs. 1 lakh from the plaintiff. The court also took into consideration PW3's version to the effect that Ext.A1 was written by him and signed by the defendant in the presence of the attestors including PW2. 5. The trial court on evidence held that the version of the defendant was not sought to be proved by any corroborative evidence apart from the bald contentions in the written statement and his interested testimony. After going into the respective rival contentions of the parties the trial court concluded that the transaction as alleged by the plaintiff stands fully established. 6. The lower appellate court in A.S. 183/2004 examined the contentions raised by the defendant in the appeal. The lower appellate court also relied on the evidence of PWs 1 to 3 and held that there are no sufficient materials to take a different view from the trial court's view. The very same contentions are raised by the learned counsel for the appellant/defnedant in this second appeal also. I am of the view that the findings arrived at by the courts below are correct and the evidence are R.S.A. No. 407 of 2009 -3- correctly appreciated. I find no reasons to interfere with the judgments and decrees passed by the courts below, under Section 100 of the C.P.C . This second appeal fails and accordingly dismissed. (HARUN-UL-RASHID, JUDGE) es. HARUN-UL-RASHID, J. --------------------------- R.S.A.No.407 of 2009 ---------------------------- JUDGMENT 27th May, 2009