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

1983 Supreme(Mad) 383

SINGARAVELU
Sesharal Bajna – Appellant
Versus
V. C. Subramanian – Respondent


Advocates:
P.S. Surana and G.V.S. Iyer, for Plaintiff; N.S. Varadachari and N.C. Ramesh, for Defendant.

Judgement

JUDGEMENT :- Suit on a promissory note to recover a sum of Rs. 1,20,400/- from the defendants.

2. The plaintiff's case is as follows : Defendants 1 and 2, who are father and son, executed a promissory note in favour of the plaintiff on 25-11-1976 for a sum of Rs. 70,000 agreeing to repay the same with interest at 24 per cent per annum. The date of the promissory note and the name of the promisee were not filled up in the promissory note and the defendants authorised the plaintiff to fill up those particulars himself. Therefore, the plaintiff has filed the suit without filling those particulars and has filed the original promissory note as it was executed by defendants 1 and 2.

3. When the executants failed to pay the interest due under the promissory note for two months, the plaintiff pressed for the same and thereupon the third defendant, namely, the wife of the first defendant, executed a letter of guarantee on 1-2-1977, for repayment of the same. All the three defendants executed the letter of guarantee in favour of the plaintiff acknowledging the liability under the promissory note. Thus, the defendants 1 and 2 as principal borrowers and the third defendant as guarantor





















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