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

2022 Supreme(Kar) 1530

JYOTI MULIMANI
V. Parushuramappa – Appellant
Versus
Chigateri Ramana Gauda – Respondent


Advocates appeared:
Santosh B.Mane, Advocate, Mallikarjunswamy B.Hiremath, Advocate, Neelendra D.Gunde, Advocate

JUDGMENT/ORDER

1. Sri.Mallikarjunswamy B.Hiremath., learned counsel for petitioner and Sri.Santosh B.Mane., learned counsel on behalf of Sri.Neelendra D.Gunde., for respondent have appeared in person.

2. For the sake of convenience, the parties shall be referred to as per their status and rankings before the Trial Court.

3. The facts, in brief, are these: It is stated that the defendant approached the plaintiff and requested the plaintiff a hand loan of Rs.50,000.00 (Rupees Fifty Thousand only) for his family's necessities and his immediate needs. Further, the defendant availed the said loan of Rs.50,000.00(Rupees Fifty Thousand only) by executing a demand promissory note on 21/4/2015 in favor of the plaintiff and agreed to pay interest at 24% per annum on the amount availed. It is averred that after availing of the loan, the defendant did not repay the amount. The plaintiff requested the defendant to repay the loan amount and interest many times. He issued a lawyer's notice dtd. 22/4/2017 and the same was served to the defendant; there was no reply from him. The defendant was due to pay an amount of Rs.75,800.00 (Rupees Seventy Five Thousand and Eight Hundred only) inclusive of int

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