Back
RAVI NATH TILHARI
Guggilapu Surya Narayana – Appellant
Versus
Sureddy Kanaka Durga Venu – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Heard Sri Ch. Srinivas, learned Counsel for the petitioner appearing through virtual mode.
2. This civil revision petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India has been filed by the petitioner challenging the order dated 01.08.2024, passed in OS No.334 of 2019 in the IA No.375 of 2024, passed by the VII Additional Civil Judge (Senior Division), Visakhapatnam dismissing the IA.
3. The petitioner is the defendant and respondent is the plaintiff in the suit.
4. The suit is filed by the plaintiff-respondent for recovery of a sum of Rs.2,71,700/- with subsequent interest @ 15% etc., based on the promissory notes.
5. Henceforth, the parties shall be referred as in the suit.
6. The plaintiff inter alia, pleaded that the defendant took loan from the plaintiff of Rs.10,00,000/- on 20.10.2016 for clearing sundry debts by depositing the original title deeds of his house and executed a demand promissory note agreeing to repay the same with interest @ 18%. Subsequently, he again borrowed an amount of Rs.3,50,000/- for other purposes and executed another demand promissory note agreeing to repay with interest @ 15%. The defendant's daughter requested the plaintiff to give the origi
The defendant's failure to plead reliance on documents in a written statement precludes their admissibility, highlighting the importance of adhering to procedural rules under the Civil Procedure Code....
The second opportunity to produce documents under Order VIII Rule 1A(3) is for those who have produced documents with the written statement and have accountable reasons for not producing certain docu....
The court established that procedural delays should not prevent the introduction of relevant evidence, prioritizing substantial justice.
The court reaffirmed that the discretion to allow late document production should prioritize substantial justice over procedural technicalities.
Procedural rules should not obstruct substantial justice; reasonable cause for non-disclosure of documents must be interpreted liberally to ensure fair adjudication.
(1) High Court has to exercise its supervisory powers sparingly and in appropriate cases to keep subordinate Courts in their authority. (2) Where a suit is based on documents, furnishing of copy of d....
High Court's supervisory powers allow correction of procedural irregularities when substantive rights are at stake, emphasizing the need for additional documents to ensure a fair trial.
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
