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

2023 Supreme(AP) 1412

T. MALLIKARJUNA RAO
Gandrothu Nagamani – Appellant
Versus
Namagiri Srinivasa Rao – Respondent


JUDGMENT

1. The Appeal, under Sec. 96 of the Code of the Civil Procedure, is filed by the appellant/plaintiff challenging the decree and Judgment dtd. 19/1/2012 in O.S.No.204 of 2012 passed by the learned I Additional Senior Civil Judge, Rajahmundry (for short, 'trial court').

2. The appellant is the plaintiff, who filed the suit in O.S.No.204 of 2012 seeking recovery of Rs.5,57,523.00 with subsequent interest and costs from the defendants based on the promissory note.

3. The parties will hereinafter be referred to as arrayed before the trial Court.

4. The facts leading to the present Appeal, in a nutshell, are as under: The defendants, who are husband and wife respectively, jointly borrowed Rs.4,00,000.00 from the plaintiff on 11/8/2010 for the family expenses and discharging sundry debts, agreeing to repay the same with subsequent interest @ 24% p.a., jointly executed the promissory note in favour of the plaintiff. As the defendants did not choose to pay the due amount under the above promissory note, despite repeated demands and even after the issuance of legal notice dtd. 2/4/2012, the plaintiff was constrained to file the suit.

5. In the written statement, the defendants conten

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