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

1958 Supreme(AP) 96

N.KUMARAYYA
Bhupathiraju Suryanarayanaraju – Appellant
Versus
Bantupalli Appanna – Respondent


N. KUMARAYYA, J.

( 1 ) TWO suits in relation to which the present revision petitions are filed, are money suits on the foot of a promissory note brought by the plaintiff before the learned District Munsif on small cause side. The defendants admitted the execution of the pronotes, but denied that they were supported by consideration and contended that they were mere fictitious transactions. When the case was called on for hearing, the defendants made up their mind to abide by the oath of the plaintiff and requested the Court to call upon the plaintiff to take special oath. The plaintiff was not prepared to take the same and consequently the petition of the defendants was dismissed. Then the defendants applied for the summoning of the plaintiff as a witness on their behalf. This petition was made under Section 32 and Order 16 Rule 10, Civil Procedure Code. It was stated therein, that even if the plaintiff says in open court without entering into the witness-box that the suit amounts were due, a decree may be granted in favour of the plaintiff. Their request however was that the plaintiff should be summoned as a witness. The court under the circumstances, did not issue orders either un




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