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

2000 Supreme(Kar) 241

H.N.TILHARI
P. HARI SHARMA – Appellant
Versus
P. VAIKUNTA SHENOY, COMPANY, BUNDER, MANGALORE – Respondent


Advocates:
K.A.Ariga, L.Vishwajit Shetty

H. N. TILHARI, J.

( 1 ) THIS is defendant's appeal from the judgment and decree dt. 30-1-1997 whereby the plaintiffs suit had been decreed in part namely for a sum of Rs. 77,019-43 ps. only with costs and future interest at 6% p. a. from the date of suit till the date of realisation of entire decretal amount. It may be mentioned here that the plaintiff originally had made a claim in the suit for a decree for a sum of Rs. 1,05,000-00. But the suit had been decreed only for Rs. 77,019-43 ps. with interest as mentioned above.

( 2 ) THE plaintiff alleged that, as per plaint allegations, he was carrying on business as commission agent and the defendant was having areca garden. The defendant used to receive money from the plaintiff now and then and the defendant had been delivering arecanuts to the plaintiff at his premises for sale on commission. According to the plaintiffs case, he used to advance money from time to time and the defendant used to take advance amount and whenever defendant was in need of money, he used to send chit for money and the plaintiff used to make advance of money and defendant was delivering arecanuts. According to the plaintiffs case, the defendant was acknowle

















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