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

1983 Supreme(Mad) 615

RAMANUJAM
K. S. Meenakshi Ammal – Appellant
Versus
M. Subbalakshmi Ammal – Respondent


Advocates:
T. Chengalvarayan for M/s. Anand, Dasgupta and Sagar, for Petitioners, K. Chandramouli, for Respondent.

Judgement

ORDER : - This revision is directed against the order of the lower Court in so far as it is against the petitioners herein. The petitioners herein are the defendants in O. S. 5346 of 1981 on the file of the City Civil Court, Madras, which is a suit filed for recovery of Rs.95200 with interest on the basis of a promissory note, Since the suit is based on a negotiable instrument. the said suit has been filed under O.37. C. P. C. The defendants applied to the Court below in I. A. 5633 of 1982 for leave to defend the said suit. In the application for leave to defend, they have raised various defences. After considering the defences taken in the application for leave to defend, the court below held that the plea put forward in the application for leave to defend cannot be true and. therefore, there is no triable issue. The court below, however, felt that the defendants could be given an opportunity to defend the suit, if they pay the entire amount claimed in the suit within one month from the date of the order. The trial court, therefore, ordered on 27-1-1983 that on the defendants depositing the entire amount claimed in the suit within 27-2-1983,they will be granted leave to d





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