V. GOPALA KRISHNA RAO
Atluri Anuradha, W/o. late Venkateswara Rao – Appellant
Versus
Nuvvula Venkata Raju, S/o. Haranadha Rao – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
V.Gopala Krishna Rao, J.
This Appeal, under Section 96 of the Code of Civil Procedure [for short ‘the C.P.C.’], is filed by the Appellants/defendants challenging the Decree and Judgment, dated 07.07.2008, in O.S. No.455 of 2005 passed by the learned I Additional Senior Civil Judge, Kakinada [for short ‘the trial Court’]. The Respondent herein is the plaintiff in the said Suit.
2. The respondent/plaintiff filed the Suit for recovery of a sum of Rs.9,03,875/- being the principal and interest due on two promissory notes dated 15.12.2003 and 15.04.2004 executed by one Atluri Venkateswara Rao in favour of plaintiff for Rs.3,50,000/- each and for costs.
3. Both the parties in the Appeal will be referred to as they are arrayed before the trial Court.
4. The brief averments of the plaint, in O.S. No.455 of2005, are as under:
One Atluri Venkateswara Rao, who is the husband of first defendant and father of defendants 2 and 3 borrowed an amount of Rs.3,50,000/- from the plaintiff on 15.12.2003 for his business purpose and for discharging his sundry debts and executed a promissory note on the same day in favour of plaintiff agreeing to repay the same with interest at 18% per annum. Again
The presumption of consideration under Section 118-A of the Negotiable Instruments Act applies unless disproven by the defendants.
The presumption of consideration under Section 118-A of the Negotiable Instruments Act applies unless disproven by the defendants.
The court upheld the validity of promissory notes, emphasizing the defendant's failure to prove forgery or lack of capacity to lend, thus confirming the trial court's judgment.
The presumption of consideration applies to promissory notes once execution is admitted, placing the burden on the defendant to prove otherwise.
The court reaffirmed that the burden of proof regarding the authenticity of a promissory note lies with the party alleging forgery, and the evidence must be evaluated on the preponderance of probabil....
The appellate court found the promissory note valid and supported by consideration, reversing the trial court's dismissal of the suit.
The presumption of validity of a promissory note under the Negotiable Instruments Act can only be rebutted by the defendant through substantial evidence, which was not provided.
The appellate court found the promissory note invalid due to lack of consideration and conflicting evidence, leading to the dismissal of the plaintiff's suit.
The presumption of consideration under Section 118 of the Negotiable Instruments Act applies once execution of the promissory note is established, placing the burden on the Defendant to rebut this pr....
The plaintiff failed to prove the validity of the promissory note, which was deemed forged, leading to the appeal's success.
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.