Back
VENUTHURUMALLI GOPALA KRISHNA RAO
Kishore Boiled Rice Mill, Rep. By Its Managing Partner, Devathu Musala Rao – Appellant
Versus
Puvvada Pullaiah, Died Per Lrs, S/o. Kotaiah – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Venuthurumalli 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 28.01.2008, in O.S. No.262 of 2002 passed by the learned Additional Senior Civil Judge, Ongole [for short ‘the trial Court’]. The first Respondent herein is the plaintiff in the said Suit.
Sole respondent/ plaintiff died during the pendency of the appeal, his legal representatives are brought on record as respondent Nos.2 to 7.
2. The respondent/plaintiff filed a Suit for recovery of a sum of Rs.7,32,394/- being the principal and interest due on a promissory note dated 05.05.1996executed by the second defendant in favour of plaintiff for Rs.3,50,000/- 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.262 of 2002, are as under:
The first defendant is a firm doing business in boiled rice mill situated at Guntur Road, Ongole, second defendant is the managing partner of the first defendant. The second defendant, being the managing partner of the first defendant, borrowe
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 plaintiff failed to prove the validity of the promissory note, which was deemed forged, leading to the appeal's success.
The presumption of consideration applies to promissory notes once execution is admitted, placing the burden on the defendant to prove otherwise.
The burden of proof lies with the plaintiff to establish the claim, and the court may rely on a preponderance of probabilities to reach a decision.
The plaintiff must discharge the legal burden of proving consideration for a promissory note, failing which the suit may be dismissed.
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 main legal point established in the judgment is the presumption of consideration under Section 118 of the Negotiable Instruments Act and the burden of proof on the defendant to rebut this presump....
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
