Back
B. S. BHANUMATHI
Indukuri Sai Manohara Raju – Appellant
Versus
Guntu Aseervadam – Respondent
JUDGMENT
1. A question whether a document of title kept by the petitioner/defendant with the mortgagee bank can be summoned from the bank without seeking the consent of the bank in writing to produce it, has cropped up in this matter.
2. This Revision Petition is filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India against the Order dtd. 28/9/2022, dismissing petition in I.A.No.158/2022 in O.S.No.165/2017 on the file of the Court of the Principal Junior Civil Judge-cum-Judicial Magistrate of I Class, Nidadavolu, by the defendent under Order XVI, Rule 6 and Sec. 151 of CPC seeking direction to wife of P.W.2, i.e., Nambri Vijaya Surya Kumari to produce the original registered sale deed dtd. 9/12/2013 registered at SRO, Sajjapuram, Tanuku, in order to send the same to a hand writing expert along with the suit promissory note for comparison of the signatures of the petitioner/defendant for opinion.
3. The respondent/plaintiff filed the suit against the petitioner/defendant for recovery of money based on the promissory note. The defendant filed the written statement disputing the execution of the suit promissory note. Therefore, the defendant filed I.A.No.158/2022 stating that the suit p
The specific statutory bar under Sec. 130 of the Evidence Act prevails over general enabling provisions, and the petitioner cannot summon a document of title from a 3rd party without obtaining the wr....
The discretionary power of the court to summon witnesses under Order 16 Rule 14 CPC and the limitations on the parties' right to invoke the power of the court under this rule.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
