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

2023 Supreme(AP) 600

T. MALLIKARJUNA RAO
Koganti Poornachandra Rao – Appellant
Versus
Yarranguntla Marry Matalda – Respondent


JUDGMENT

1. Feeling aggrieved with the decree and judgment dt.24/11/2008 in O.S. No.611 of 2007 passed by the Principal Senior Civil Judge, Vijayawada (for short "the trial court"), whereby dismissed the suit, the plaintiff therein has preferred the present appeal.

2. The parties hereinafter will be referred to as depicted in the suit for convenience.

3. The brief averments culled out from the plaint are that the defendant borrowed Rs.3, 00, 000.00 from the plaintiff for her family expenses on 17/1/2005 and executed a promissory note on the same day, agreeing to repay the amount along with interest @ 24% per annum. However, despite the repeated demands and even after issuance of the registered legal notice dt.2/4/2007, the defendant failed to discharge the said debt. The defendant acknowledged the receipt of the notice on 3/4/2007.

4. The defendant filed a written statement denying the material allegations, contending that:

    a) She is unaware of the plaintiff's name and has never seen the plaintiff, the scribe, or the attestors. Moreover, the defendant never borrowed any amount, and she never executed any promissory note in favour of the plaintiff on 17/1/2005 for Rs.3, 00, 000.00 and d

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