Court Orders Repayment of CNY 390 Fertilizer Debt

A court in Eastern China City has ruled in favor of a fertilizer seller who sought repayment of a 390 CNY debt dating back to 2006. The plaintiff, Mr. Tian, brought the action against the buyer, Mr. Yan, after repeated requests for payment were ignored. The court found the debt valid and the IOU clear, ordering full repayment. The defendant did not appear at the hearing.

The dispute arose on October 26, 2006, when Mr. Yan purchased fertilizer from Mr. Tian’s agricultural supply business. At the time, Mr. Yan asked to pay later, citing other commitments, and because the two were acquainted, Mr. Tian agreed. Mr. Yan wrote a handwritten IOU acknowledging the debt of 390 CNY. Over the following years, Mr. Tian asked Mr. Yan many times to pay, but Mr. Yan refused on various grounds. In February 2012, Mr. Tian filed a lawsuit seeking the principal of 390 CNY plus interest of 260 CNY, though during the hearing he revised his claim to only the principal and court costs.

At the hearing, the court heard evidence from Mr. Tian, who explained the origin of the debt and the circumstances of the sale. The key piece of documentary evidence was the IOU written by Mr. Yan. Mr. Yan was properly summoned by the court but did not appear or submit a defense. The court proceeded with the hearing in his absence, relying on the submitted evidence and Mr. Tian’s testimony. The evidence was considered sufficient and credible.

The court held that debts must be repaid. The facts showed that Mr. Yan had purchased fertilizer from Mr. Tian and had signed an IOU for the amount owed. The evidence was clear and complete. According to relevant law, including provisions of the General Principles of Civil Law and the Contract Law, a valid debt arises from a lawful transaction. The court found that Mr. Yan’s failure to pay constituted a breach and that Mr. Tian was entitled to recover the full principal of 390 CNY.

The case involved a sample-based sales contract, meaning the fertilizer was sold according to a sample shown to the buyer. Even though the transaction was informal and based on trust, the written IOU established the essential terms: the parties, the amount, and the obligation to pay. The court applied the principle that a debtor is liable for debts arising from such contracts. The defendant’s absence did not prevent the court from finding the debt valid. The court also noted that Mr. Tian had voluntarily dropped his claim for interest, simplifying the judgment.

This case illustrates the importance of maintaining written evidence of even small debts. The IOU served as a clear record that allowed the court to rule efficiently despite the defendant’s non-appearance. For farmers and small business owners, this judgment reinforces that informal credit arrangements are enforceable when supported by documentation. The court’s decision also highlights that litigation, even for small amounts, can succeed when the facts and evidence are straightforward. The defendant was also ordered to bear the court costs.

Disclaimer: This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice.