MALASRI NANDI
Obuk Mize, Son of Sri Tamin Mize – Appellant
Versus
State of A. P. – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Heard Mr. M. Biswas, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. T. Ete, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State Arunachal Pradesh and Mr. G. Taloh, learned counsel for the respondent No. 2.
2. This is an application under section 482 of Cr.P.C. r/w Section 226 of Constitution of India for quashing of order dated 16.06.2023 passed by the learned CJM, Yupia in G.R.Case No. 477/2021(corresponding to Naharlagun P.S. Case No.95/2021) under Section 465/193 IPC.
3. The case of the petitioner is that he had taken a loan of Rs. 5,00,000/-(Rupees five lakhs) only from the respondent No.2 on 14.09.2015 for a period of three months at an interest @ 8% per month. In this regard, a money receipt was executed by the petitioner on 14.09.2015. After the expiry of three months, the petitioner offered to return an amount to Rs.6,20,000/- to the respondent No.2 who refused to accept the said amount demanding an additional amount of Rs. 40,000/-. Subsequently, the petitioner had received a notice from the counsel of respondent No. 2 demanding Rs. 5,00,000/- with agreed interest from the petitioner. On inquiry, the respondent No.2 intimated the petitioner that he had to pay Rs
Fadi Fadel son of Aziz Fadel v. The State of Bihar
Gopalakrishna Menon & Anr. Vs. D. Raja Reddy & Anr.
Lalji Haridas v. State of Maharashtra & Ors.
Patel Laljibhai Somabhai vs. State of Gujrat
Sachida Nand Singh & Anr. V. State of Bihar & Anr.
State of Punjab versus Kasturilal and Ors. reported in AIR 2004 SC 4087
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.