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

1985 Supreme(AP) 403

B.P.JEEVAN REDDY, P.KODANDA RAMAYYA
G. Lakshminarasayamma – Appellant
Versus
Bonu Satyavathi – Respondent


P. KODANDARAMAYYA, J.

( 1 ) THE plaintiff is the appellant in this appeal. The appeal relates only to interest in so far it was disallowed by the trial court while decreeing the plaintiff s suit.

( 2 ) THE suit is laid on the foot of a promissory note executed by one Bonu satyanarayana under Ex. A-1, dated 18-2-1975 for a sum of Rs. 20,000/ -. The interest stipulated therein is 30% p. a. The plaint alleged that no amount was paid under the suit pronote, that the executant died and that defendants who are the wife and children of the executant were added as parties and the action was laid for recovery of the debt with interest stipulated therein.

( 3 ) THE defendants contested the suit denying the execution, the consideration and the enforceabitity of the same against them. They also raised the plea that they are entitled to the benefit of act IV of 1933 and the interest claimed is usurious and excessive.

( 4 ) THE court below framed relevant issues at paragraph 5 and held that the suit promissory note is true and enforceable against the defendants and the defendants are not protected by Act iv of 1938 but held that the interest is excessive and directed that the decree will be pass







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