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

2007 Supreme(Mad) 1257

S.NAGAMUTHU
A. Perumal Raj – Appellant
Versus
B. Rajendran – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner:D. Nallathambi, Advocate.
For the Respondent:M. Thilagar, Advocate.

Judgment :-

This Civil Revision Petition has been filed challenging the order-dated 08.04.2005 made in I.A.No.954 of 2004 in O.S.No.88 of 2004 on the file of the District Munsif, Aruppukottai.

2. Brief facts of the case are as follows:-

The petitioner is the defendant in O.S.No.88 of 2004 on the file of the learned District Munsif, Aruppukottai and the respondent herein is the plaintiff. The respondent has filed the above suit for recovery of money due under a promissory note. The petitioner has filed a written statement denying the execution of the promissory note. After framing of issues, the trial Court has proceeded with the trial of the case. On the side of the plaintiff, it is reported that two witnesses have been examined and on the side of the petitioner/defendant, D.W.1 alone has been examined. At this stage, the petitioner/defendant has filed I.A.No.954 of 2004 seeking permission to file additional written statement. The respondent opposed the said application by filing counter stating that the petition has been filed so belatedly and the intention behind the petition is only to drag on the proceedings. When the suit has been pending from the year 2002 onwards it is too late














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