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

2000 Supreme(Kar) 203

H.N.TILHARI
PRASANNA AND COMPANY, BANGALORE – Appellant
Versus
PRASANNA KUMAR – Respondent


Advocates:
K.SURYANARAYANA MURTHY, M.C.RAVI KUMAR, M.RAMAIAH, R.MAHESH

H. N. TILHARI, J.

( 1 ) THIS is a Regular First Appeal filed by the plaintiff appellant arises from the judgment and decree dated 2nd January, 1997 passed by the II additional City Civil Judge, Bangalore City (Mr. A. V. Chandrashekar) in O. S. No. 421 of 1989 dismissing the suit of the plaintiff-appellant for the recovery of a sum of Rs. 43,783/ -.

( 2 ) THE facts of the case in nutshell are: that the plaintiff filed the above suit against the defendants claiming decree for a sum of Rs. 43,783/- with interest at the rate of 20% per annum from 22-2-1988 till the date of payment and for a direction to seize the autorikshaw bearing No. CAM 125 and for its being handed over to the custody of the plaintiff. 2-A. As per the plaint allegations, the plaintiff claimed to be a private money-lending firm registered with the Registrar of Money-Lenders, bangalore and carrying on the business of financing loans on the basis of security and hypothecation of goods and vehicles. The plaintiff alleged that he was a valid money-lender having the licence for this purpose i. e. , on the date of the suit transaction as well as on the date of filing of the suit. The plaintiff alleged that defendant 1 (res






















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