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

2001 Supreme(Mad) 1308

M.CHOCKALINGAM
T. N. Boopathy – Appellant
Versus
T. A. Sattu – Respondent


Appearing Advocates:A. Seshan, T. Vadivelu, Advocates.

Judgment :-

This second appeal has arisen from the judgment and decree of the learned Principal Subordinate Judge, Vellore made in A. S. No. 70/87 dated 23-12-1988 reversing the judgment and decree of the learned District Munsif, Ranipet passed in O.S. No. 484 of 1985 dated 10-7-1987.

2. The respondent herein filed a suit against the appellant seeking a decree for a sum of Rs. 8, 080/- with further interest with the following averments. On 15-11-1982 the appellant/defendant executed a promissory note in favour of Kamalammal, the mother of the respondent/plaintiff for a sum of Rs. 6, 000/- and received the said sum that day agreeing to repay the same on demand with interest at 30% per annum. The defendant did not pay the said amount despite repeated demands. Notice dated 2-8-85 was issued and the same was acknowledged on 6-8-85, but there was no reply. The said Kamalammal died leaving her only son, the respondent/plaintiff as her only heir to succeed to her and hence the defendant/appellant was bound to pay to the plaintiff the amount due under the said promissory note. The respondent/plaintiff obtained a succession certificate from the Sub Court, Vellore. The defendant/appellant was












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