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

2014 Supreme(Mad) 3882

P.DEVADASS
A. R. Mohammed Jalaludeen – Appellant
Versus
V. S. Dhakshinamoorthy – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
G.R. Swaminathan, K. Govindarajan, Advocates.

JUDGMENT

P. DEVADASS, J.

1. The defendants in O.S. No. 48 of 2007, who have succeeded before the trial Court/II Additional Subordinate Judge, Tiruchirappalli since became unsuccessful in the First Appeal in A.S. No. 47 of 2009 before the Principal District Court, Tiruchirappalli are before us as appellants.

2. The respondent instituted the suit in O.S. No. 48 of 2007 for recovery of Rs. 2,00,000/-plus interest totally Rs. 2,17,000/- on the allegations that on 15.06.2013, he advanced Rs. 1,50,000/- under a promissory note to the defendants, who are spouses, for interest and as they have not paid the accrued interest and the amounts were calculated and it was arrived at Rs. 2,00,000/- and a fresh promissory note for the same was executed on 05.05.2006. However thereafter, inspite of notice neither they have paid the interest nor the principal. Thus, the institution of the suit.

3. The appellants/defendants have filed written statement resisting the suit, contending that they have not borrowed Rs. 1,50,000/- as pleaded in the plaint. They have not executed any promissory note. Plaintiff filled a blank promissory note and made it suit promissory note.

4. The trial Court framed neces


























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