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

1966 Supreme(AP) 104

MANOHAR PERSHAD
Pendekanti Subbarayudu – Appellant
Versus
Bysani Venkatanarasayya – Respondent


MANOHAR PERSHAD, J.

( 1 ) IN this batch of appeals, the short point that falls for determination is whether the defendant appellant prosecuted the respondents maliciously and without probable and reasonable cause. Both the Courts on the evidence have held that the defendant-appellant prosecuted the plaintiff-respondents without any reasonable or probable cause.

( 2 ) SHRI Suryanarayana, learned counsel for the defendant-appellant conceded that the conclusions of both the Courts on the evidence is correct, but contended that the entire approach by the Courts below is wrong inasmuch as they placed the burden on the defendant-appellant when as a matter of fact the burden is always on the plaintiff in an action for malicious prosecution to prove that the defendant had no reasonable or probable cause for the prosecution. I do not find any force in the contention advanced by the learned counsel for the appellant.

( 3 ) IT is no doubt true that ordinarily the onus of establishing that the defendant had no reasonable and probable cause for the prosecution lies on the plaintiff; but where the accusation against the plaintiff was in respect of an offence which the defendant claimed to have se






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