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

2005 Supreme(Mad) 668

R.BANUMATHI
Pauvel Raj – Appellant
Versus
Palaniammal – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:For the Petitioner:Vijayashanthi, Advocate. For the Respondent: No appearance.

Judgment :-

(Petition filed under Section 115 C.P.C against the fair and decretal order dated 2.1.2003 made in I.A.876 of 2002 in O.S.809 of 2001 by the Principal District Munsif, Trichy.)

This Revision is preferred against the fair and decretal order of the Principal District Munsif, Trichy made in I.A.876/2002 in O.S.No.809/2001 dated 2.1.2003, dismissing the petition filed under Rule 76 C.P.C to call for the Attendance Register from the Government Hospital, Pallapatti. Defendant is the Revision Petitioner.

2. The case of the Respondent / Plaintiff is that on 17.8.1998, the Defendant borrowed a sum of Rs.15,000/- from the Plaintiff for family expenses and executed a suit Promissory Note in favour of the Plaintiff on the same day, agreeing to repay the principal amount together with interest. Inspite of repeated demands and issuance of legal notice, the Defendant has not paid the amount. Hence, suit O.S.809/01 was filed by the Respondent / Plaintiff for recovery of Rs.20,400/- and subsequent interest and costs.

3. Denying the borrowal from the Plaintiff, the Defendant has filed written statement contending that in the year 1994 he has borrowed a sum of Rs.1,000/- from one Ramalingam,





















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