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

1969 Supreme(Bom) 47

B.N.DESHMUKH
Govindram Mihamal – Appellant
Versus
Chetumal Villardas – Respondent


JUDGMENT - 1. This is plaintiffs appeal, whose suit for recovery of an amount under a sarkat note has been dismissed by the two Courts below.

2. So far as this appeal is concerned, no dispute on facts survives for consideration. Certain findings have been given by the two Courts below which are normally binding on this Court, Even otherwise, they appear to be in consonance with the facts and circumstances and do not require to be reconsidered. The position of facts that appears to be proved and which could be taken as a basis for the decision of this second appeal is this: Mithamal, the father of the plaintiff, as a karta of the joint Hindu family, advanced a loan to the defendant on 19-6-1950 under a sarkat note. The loan was renewed br acknowledged by another earkat note, dated 9-6-1953, There was a third sarkat note, dated 9-6-1956. After their renewal Mithamal died in or about February 1958. The plaintiff, who is the eldest son of Mithamal, has filed the present suit on 15-6-1959 for recovery of the amount due under the sarkat note. The plaintiff has claimed the principal amount under the sarkat note together with interest.

3. Several defences were raised. The defendant pleaded t








































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