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

1997 Supreme(Raj) 1088

ARUN MADAN
Vinod Kumar Agarwal – Appellant
Versus
Jagdish Prasad – Respondent


JUDGMENT

1. - This revision petition has been preferred to this Court against the Order dated 14.9.1993 (Annexure-6) passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate-cum-Civil Judge, Bharatpur, whereby the said court had dismissed petitioner's/defendant's application under Order 7 Rule 1.1 read with Sections to & 151 of the CPC.

2. The girevance of the petitioner as unfolded by this revision petition in short is that the non- petitioners/plaintiffs filed a Civil Suit in the court of Civil Judge, Bharatpur against petitioner-defendant for payment of damages to the tune of Rs. 45,000/- for the alleged defence of having published defamatory material against them, which culminated in filing of the said suit by the plaintiffs.

3. On 27.00.1992 one Mahesh Chandar, S/o Shiv Charan R/o Kirawali, District Agra, Uttar Pradesh, who is the real brother of non-petitioner Nos. 1 & 3 and son of Non- petitioner No. 2 had sent a registered notice through his counsel to the petitioner-defendant contending inter-alia that the non-petitioners had advanced a sum of Rs. 50,000/- to the petitioner-defendant on the execution of a promissory note, but since the said amount had not been returned within the sti































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