SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2003 Supreme(AP) 365

DUBAGUNTA SUBRAHMANYAM
G. Venkata Rama Subbaiah – Appellant
Versus
D. Rasool Naik – Respondent


DUBAGUNTA SUBRAHMANYAM, J.

( 1 ) THIS appeal is filed against the judgment and decree dated 16-4-1990 in A. S. No. 57 of 1988 on the file of II Additional District Judge, Kurnool setting aside the judgment and decree dated 8-8-1988 in OS No. 21 of 1988 on the file of principal Subordinate Judge, Kurnool. The plaintiff is the appellant

( 2 ) NECESSARY facts for the disposal of this appeal are as follows: plaintiff filed a suit for recovery of a sum of Rs. 18,210/- on the plea that on 1-4-1985 the defendant borrowed Rs. 18,000/- from the plaintiff and executed the suit promissory note Ex. A1 agreeing to repay the amount with future interest at 12% per annum. The defendant contested the suit. He is the owner of a printing press. The plaintiff is also owner of a printing press. According to the defendant, the District collector invited tenders for printing ration cards, the plaintiff and owners of some small printing presses formed themselves into a syndicate and approached the defendant and requested him to file a tender quoting rate at 0-75 paise per card and the plaintiff and other printers would file tenders quoting a higher price and after the lowest tender of the defendant is accep








Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top