V. R. K. KRUPA SAGAR
Tirigedala Ramanayya – Appellant
Versus
Chenuthala Apparao – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Defendant in the suit filed this second appeal under Section 100 C.P.C. Respondent herein is the plaintiff in the suit.
2. For hearing before admission, notice was taken out to respondent and the same was personally served on respondent on 06.08.2012. But no appearance has been made at any time thereafter. Therefore this appeal has been taken up for hearing exparte.
3. The controversy between the parties is a debt transaction based on a promissory note. Plaintiff filed O.S.No.249 of 2009 before the learned Principal Junior Civil Judge, Vizianagaram stating that on 10.11.2003 defendant borrowed an amount of Rs.30,000/- from him and agreed to repay with interest @ 24% P.A. and executed the suit promissory note in favour of the plaintiff. Subsequently, the defendant paid Rs.5,000/- on 30.10.2006 and Rs.100/- on 7.05.2008. On both occasions defendant himself made acknowledgments of such part payments on the reverse side of the promissory note. Subsequently as the defendant failed to repay the balance due, plaintiff got issued a notice of demand dated 03.03.2009 to which there was no response from the defendant and therefore claiming the principal and interest accrued there on t
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.