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

1956 Supreme(AP) 39

Gokeda Latcharao – Appellant
Versus
Viswanadham Bhimayya – Respondent


SUBBA RAO, C. J.

( 1 ) I think this is a case which mm I be heard by a Bench, as there is no authoritative decision covering the question raised in the case. The suit out of which the second appeal arose was instituted on foot of two promissory notes. Exhibit A-1 dated 14th June, 1947, for Rs. 1500 and Exhibit A-2 dated 10th August, 1947, for Rs. 1,000 executed by the defendant in favour of plaintiff. The defence to the suit was that the promissory notes were executed when the defendant was a minor and that the suit notes were not supported by consideration.

( 2 ) THE plaintiff relied on a fraudulent misrepresentation made by the defendant regarding his age and he also raised the contention that the amount was supplied for the necessaries of the defendant and his family. The trial Court found that as admitted by the defendant only Rs. 250 was received under the promissory notes by the defendant and that the balance of the consideration was not paid. It was also found that the defendant as a minor on the date of the execution of the promissory notes and that there was no fraudulent misrepresentation regarding the age. On these findings, he dismissed the plaintiff s claim.

( 3 ) ON a































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