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

1973 Supreme(AP) 85

O.CHHINNAPPA REDDY
Mohd Abdul Qadeeer – Appellant
Versus
Azamatullah Khan – Respondent


O. CHINNAPPA REDDY, J.

( 1 ) 1. The plaintiff is the appellant in this appeal. The facts which are now not in dispute are as follows : Samadani Begum borrowed a a sum of Rs. 30,000/- from the plaintiff and executed a promissory note Ex. A. 1 dated 20-12-1958 in favour of the plaintiff. She also gave a receipt Ex. A. 2 for the same amount. The receipt was attested by Abu Mohammad Abdur Rahman husband of Samdani begum. Samdani Begum died issueless on 20-6-1959. On her death, her heirs were her husband Abu Mohammed Abdur Rahman and her other kindred, defendant 1 to 5. The husband was entitled to a half share of her estate and was liable to pay, under Mohammadan Law, half the debt due to the plaintiff. Defendants 1 to 5 were similarly entitled to half the estate of Samdani Begum and were liable to pay half the debt due to the plaintiff. On 3-10-1961 Abu Mohammad Abdur Rahman made a part payment of a sum of Rs. 1000/- to the plaintiff, An endorsement of pare payment was made on the promissory note and a separate document Ex. A. 14 was also executed by which Abu Mohammed abdur Rahman acknowledgse the debt due to the plaintiff. Abu mohammad Abdur Rahman died on 12-2-1962. Defendants 6 to 8







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