Cheque-based loan advances may fall outside money-lender restrictions, while documentary proof can justify temporary injunction relief.

Advances made through cheques are treated as falling outside the definition of loan under the Bengal Money-Lenders Act, 1940 because the statutory exclusion for advances on negotiable instruments applies, so the bar under section 13 does not operate. Documentary material showing disbursement in tranches, later interest payments, and TDS acknowledgements may establish a prima facie loan transaction and jural relationship, supporting interim protection under Order XXXIX Rule 1 CPC. Where the relief sought is temporary restraint rather than attachment before judgment, Order XXXVIII Rule 5 is not attracted, and injunction may issue if prima facie case, balance of convenience, and irreparable injury are shown.

---

---

Issues: (i) whether a loan advanced through cheques fell outside the definition of loan under the Bengal Money-Lenders Act, 1940 so that the statutory bar in section 13 did not apply; (ii) whether the applicant had made out a case for temporary injunction under Order XXXIX Rule 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908.

Issue (i): Whether a loan advanced through cheques fell outside the definition of loan under the Bengal Money-Lenders Act, 1940 so that the statutory bar in section 13 did not apply.

Analysis: The statutory definition of loan under section 2(12) excludes advances made on the basis of a negotiable instrument, while section 13 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 treats a cheque as a negotiable instrument. On a conjoint reading, money advanced through cheques does not attract the mischief of section 13 of the Bengal Money-Lenders Act, 1940. The requirement of proving an effective money-lending licence therefore did not arise on the facts.

Conclusion: The statutory bar was held inapplicable, and the objection based on the Bengal Money-Lenders Act failed.

Issue (ii): Whether the applicant had made out a case for temporary injunction under Order XXXIX Rule 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908.

Analysis: The record showed disbursement of money in five tranches by cheque, later interest payments, and tax deduction at source reflecting the respondent's acknowledgment of the transaction. These materials established a jural relationship and a prima facie case. The court treated the request as one for temporary restraint, not attachment before judgment, and held that the principles of Order XXXVIII Rule 5 were not attracted. On the materials presented, the elements of prima facie case, balance of convenience, and irreparable injury favoured interim protection.

Conclusion: Temporary injunction was warranted in favour of the applicant.

Final Conclusion: The applicant was entitled to interim restraint over the respondent's immovable assets and properties until further orders, and the application was allowed.

Ratio Decidendi: An advance made by cheque is excluded from the Bengal Money-Lenders Act, 1940, and where documentary material shows a prima facie loan transaction and acknowledgement through interest payments with TDS, temporary injunction may issue under Order XXXIX Rule 1 when the balance of convenience and risk of irreparable injury justify protection.

---