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

2006 Supreme(Mad) 2971

K.RAVIRAJA PANDIAN
R. Bharat Kumar – Appellant
Versus
J. Sathiyanathan – Respondent


Appearing Advocates:For the Petitioner:K. Mohanamurali, Advocate. For the Respondent:R.N. Kothandaraman, Advocate.

Judgment :-

(Petition under Article 227 of The Constitution of India against the order dated 3.10.2005 made in I.A.No.14867 of 2004 in O.S.NO. 2750 of 2004 on the file of the First Assistant Judge, City Civil Court, Chennai.)

This revision petition has been filed against the order at the instance of the defendant/respondent herein to defend the summary suit filed by the petitioner herein.

2. The precise case is that the respondent herein borrowed a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- for purchase of immovable property and for family expenses and executed promissory notes dated 25.6.2001 promising to repay the same with interest at 24% per annum. In spite of repeated demands and notice dated 23.3.2004, the amount has not been paid by the respondent nor sent any reply to notice sent by the petitioner. Hence the suit filed in a summary manner under Order XXXVII Rule 1 of the Civil Procedure Code.

3. The defendant/respondent herein filed an application seeking leave to defend the suit on the premise that there is a triable issue in the suit because of the relationship between the petitioner and the respondent. The petitioner used to lend money for interest. In such transactions, the petitioner obtaine




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