' The present suit was filed on 17th May, 1971 by the plaintiffs for the recovery of Rs, 9,54,504.22 against the defendants. Defendant No, 1 is a partnership firm and defendants Nos. 2 and 3 were impleaded as partners of defendant No, I. The case of the plaintiff is that a cash credit limit was granted to the defendants by the plaintiffs branch at Liaquat Bazar, Karachi, which was utilized from time to time by the defendants and as the account was not adjusted by the defendants, the present suit was filed to recover the amount payable by the defendants. The defendants filed a written statement. The following issues were adopted by this Court by order dated 17th May, 1974.
(1) Whether the promissory Note on which the suit is based is without consideration ?
(2) Whether the suit is bit by provisions of Limitation Act ?
(3) Whether the interest charged by the plaintiff is in accordance with the Agreement between the parties ?
(4) Whether the mode of calculating the interest on monthly rest is contrary to State Bank Directions and against the provisions of West Pakistan Usurious Loan Ordinance ?
(5) Whether the plaintiff obtained signatures of the defendants on Blank Forms and promissory Notes. If so what is its effect?
(6) Whether the increase in the rate of interest thrusted upon the defendants on previous debts is unconcionable under law ?
(7) What is the value of Securities pledged ?
(8) Whether the failure of the plaintiffs to liquidate their debt by disposal of pledged goods instead of filing this suit raises a presumption that the goods have been tampered with. If so, whether the plaintiff is entitled to a decree ?
(9) What should the decree be ?
2. In this case, the statement of account (Exh. 82) filed by the plaintiff Bank has been admitted on behalf of defendants except entries relating to interest. Further the promissory Note dated 27th September, 1969 (Exh. 14) for Rs, 8,06,559.53 with interest at 4% above bank rate minimum 9% has been admitted. Rate of interest is also mentioned in the agreement for cash-credit (Exh. 15), dated 27th September, 1969 which document has also been admitted by the defendants. The balance confirmation slip (Exh. 12) whereby the defendants admitted the balance of Rs, 7,50,031.03 as on 31st December, 1968 has also been admitted. The factum of grant of cash-credit limit and its utilization by the defendants is also admitted by the defendants.
' In this case P. W. 1 (Exh. 162), an officer of the National Bank of Pakistan, had been examined and has given evidence regarding the grant of cash-credit to the defendants which was utilized by them from time to time. He has further stated that the interest that has been charged on the amount drawn by the defendants from time to time as reflected in the statement of account was charged on the basis of documents executed by the defendants and that the interest had been charged at the agreed rate of interest and that the rate of interest is provided in the cash-credit agreement between the parties and the promissory note executed by the defendants. He has further deposed about the State Bank of Pakistan's rate of interest at the relevant times. On the question of interest there was no cross-examination of this witness on behalf of the defendants. I may now deal with the issues framed in this case.
3. Issue No, 1 relates to the promissory note being without consideration. The burden of this issue is on the defendants. Even otherwise it has been established on the basis of admitted documents and the evidence of P. W.
1. (Exh. 162) that the promissory note was executed for consideration. Further the promissory note itself has been admitted by the defendants. Issue No, 1 is decided in the negative against the defendants.
4. Issue No, 2 relates to limitation. In view of the statement of account being admitted as also the promissory note dated 27th September, 1969 agreement for cash-credit dated 27th September, 1969 and the balance confirmation slip dated 31st December, 1968 the suit, which was filed on 17th May, 1971 is within time and is not barred by limitation. Issue No, 2 is also decided in the negative against the defendants.
5. Issues Nos. 3, 4 and 6 relate to interest. The evidence of P. W. 1 (Exh. 162) relating to charging of interest according to agreed rates has not been challenged. Further his evidence regarding State Bank of Pakistan's rate of interest has also not been challenged. It has not been shown by the defendants that the interest charged is contrary to State Bank's directions or that it is against the provision of any law. The plaintiff has proved by admitted documents as well as through the evidence of P. W. 1 that the interest that has been charged by the plaintiff is according to the agreement between the parties. Issue No, 3 is decided in the affirmative and issues Nos. 4 and 6 are decided in the negative against the defendants.
6. Issue No, 5 relates to signatures of the defendants on blank forms and promissory notes. The defendants have admitted the promissory note. Statement of account has also been admitted. In these circumstances Issue No, 5 has become redundant.
7. Issues Nos. 7 and 8 are the subject-matter of suit No, 720/76 which is pending in this Court and as such it is not necessary to decide these two issues in this suit. No arguments were addressed by the two learned counsel on these two issues.
8. In view of my findings on Issues Nos. I to 6, the plaintiffs are entitled to a decree as prayed. The suit of the plaintiffs is accordingly decreed in the sum of Rs, 9,54,504.22 against the defendants, jointly and severally, with interest at the rate of 9% per annum from the date of filing the suit till payment. The plaintiffs shall also be entitled to costs.