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

2002 Supreme(Raj) 490

ARUN MADAN
Arjun Singh – Appellant
Versus
Shanti Devi – Respondent


Advocates:
Appearance :
Manish Sharma, for the Appellant

Judgment

Arun Madan, J.-Heard learned counsel for the parties, with the consent of the parties, the matter is being finally disposed of at the admission stage itself

2. The case of the plaintiff respondent is that respondent filed a suit under Order 37 Rule 1 CPC on 6.2000 for realisation of the amount stating that defendant being known to plaintiff’s husband therefore, approached the plaintiff on 17.1.98 and asked for loan for his business and pursuant thereto plaintiff gave a sum of Rs. 51,840/-to the defendant. It is also stated in the plaint that the said amount was to be returned within one month alongwith interest @ 24% per annum. An agreement to this effect was also executed by defendant on stamp paper of Rs. 10/-. It is further pleaded that defendant also handed over a post dated cheque for Rs. 5 1,840/-and promised that he would make the payment of the aforesaid loan amount with interest @ 24% but he filed to repay the said amount therefore, on 15.2000 plaintiff served a notice through her Counsel for the said amount but that notice was returned with the remarks that defendant is not available. Since defendant had not paid the principal amount therefore, plaintiff has praye









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