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

1992 Supreme(AP) 337

G.RADHA KRISHNA RAO, MOTILAL B.NAIK
Andhra Bank, Sultan Bazar, Hyderabad – Appellant
Versus
Manney Industries – Respondent


( 1 ) THE plaintiff in OS No. 185/83 on the file of the Addl. Dist. Judge, Rangareddy District at Begumpet, Secunderabad is the appellant herein and the present appeal is preferred against the judgment and decree in OS No, 185/83. The appellant-plaintiff is a nationalised bank viz. Andhra Bank, Sultanbazar Branch, Hyderabad, filed a suit for recovery of a sum of Rs. 9,49,137-54 and they sought a decree against D1 to D7 (respondents 1 to 7) who are the partners and also against D8 (respondents herein) who created an equitable mortgage. The fact of amount that was lent to the sick unit which was meant for commercial purpose is not in dispute. The default committed by the respondent-defendants is also not in dispute. Since the appellant-plaintiff failed in recovering the amount due, filed the suit and the court below after considering the evidence granted decree for the original amount that has been claimed and with interest at 6% p. a. from the date of suit till the date of realisation. While granting the decree with interest at 6% p. a. the lower court relied upon the decisions reported in S. P. Majoo v. Gangadhar, AIR 1969 SC 600, Jaigobind Singh v. Lachminarain, AIR 1940 FC 20; an






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