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

R.G.VAIDYANATHA
Central Bank of India – Appellant
Versus
Tarseema Compress Wood Manufacturing Co. and others – Respondent


JUDGMENT - R.G. VAIDYANATHA, J.:---This is a suit filed by the plaintiff-bank. Defendants have contested the suit by filing written statement. Issues have been framed. Plaintiff examined one witness and closed it's case. One witness has been examined on behalf of defendants. I have heard learned Counsel appearing for both the sides.

2.The plaintiff is Central Bank of India and it has filed this suit on the following allegations :

The first defendant is a partnership firm of which the defendants Nos. 2 to 4 are partners. It is stated that the first defendant-firm obtained two loans from the plaintiff-bank in 1970 which are cash credit (open loan) facility upto a limit of Rs. 15,000/- and cash credit (key loan) facility upto a limit of Rs. 15,000/- and executed a promissory note and other documents. Again in 1977 the first defendant availed the loan facility upto a limit of Rs. 60,000/- and executed a promissory note and other documents. Then it is stated that on 15th June, 1978 the defendants availed cash credit facility upto a limit of Rs. 60,000/- and cash credit (key loan) facility upto a limit of Rs. 2,50,000/- and executed a promissory note and other documents. The defendants hav






























































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