Heard Sri. Jiji S., Advocate for the appellant and Sri.
Jawahar Jose, Advocate on behalf of the respondent.
2. The courts below have concurrently decreed the suit for realisation of money based on a dishonoured cheque. The case of the defendant is that the plaintiff entered the date in Ext. A1 cheque and filed the suit for money. The other entries in Ext. A1 cheque are however not disputed by the defendant.
3. This Court in Bhaskaran Chandrasekharan v.
Radhakrishnan [1998 (1) KLT 881] has upheld the implied authority of the payee to enter the date in the cheque. The finding of the courts below that the cheque is duly executed and it is supported by consideration is rested on evidence. The defendant though has entered appearance in the trial court did not choose to mount the box.
4. There is no question of law much less any substantial question of law in this regular second appeal. I however grant the defendant time to pay the decree debt to avert coercive steps. The amount shall be paid in ten equal R.S.A. No. 776 of 2014 2 monthly instalments starting from 01.01.2015. The plaintiff can execute the decree if the defendant commits default in any one of the instalments.
The Regular Second Appeal is dismissed.
V.CHITAMBARESH JUDGE DCS