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

1983 Supreme(Mad) 41

V.RAMASWAMI, RATNAM
Pl. Ct. Sp. Subramaniam Chettiar – Appellant
Versus
Muthiah Chettiar – Respondent


JUDGMENT

1. The defendant is the appellant. The suit was filed by the plaintiff respondent for the recovery of a sum of Rs. 24655 due under two promissory notes dated 25-6-1969 Ex. A-1 and 2-9-1969 Exhibit A-2. A sum of Rs.1000 was paid towards the promissory note dated 25-6-1969 and an endorsement was made on 24-11-1969. On 7-4-1972, he executed a fresh promissory note for a sum of Rs. 18,750/-. Which was the total amount due under Exs. A-1 and A-2 with interest up till that date, on the same day identical endorsement were made in Exs. A-1and A-2 to the effect that by execution of the promissory note dated 7-4-1972 the amount due under the promissory note has been discharged. Subsequently the plaintiff herein assigned the promissory note dated 7-4-1972, in favour of one Muthukaruppan chettair. The assigned filed O.S 34 of 1973 for the recovery of the amount due under the note dated 7-4-1972. It appears that the defendant contented in the suit that Muthukaruppan was not a bona fide holder in due course that the suit was premature since one year thavanai was fixed for payment, that the promissory note was an instrument payable otherwise that on demand and not a negotiable instrument







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