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

2014 Supreme(Mad) 3847

P.DEVADASS
V. Sindhu – Appellant
Versus
C. Thangamoni – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellants:G.R. Swaminathan, Advocate.
For the Respondent:R. Jeyaraj, Advocate.

Judgment

1. This Second Appeal has been preferred by the defendants 2 and 3 in O.S.No.195 of 2001 which was decreed by the learned Subordinate Judge, Padmanabhapuram, which has been upheld by the learned District Judge, Kanyakumari at Nagercoil in A.S.No.42 of 2005 which was preferred by the defendants 2 and 3.

2. The respondent, namely, Thangamoni instituted the suit in O.S.No.190 of 2001 in the court of the learned Subordinate Judge, Padmanabhapuram, alleging that the first defendant, namely, Vijayakumar has borrowed Rs.1½ lakhs from him one month before 25.03.1997 and he had agreed to repay the amount on 25.03.1997 and he had issued Ex.A.1 cheque to the respondent for the said amount. Since the cheque was dishonoured under Ex.A.2 by the Banker the respondent issued Ex.A.3 and A5 notices which were received by the first defendant. There was no reply. No money. In the circumstances, the respondent instituted the said suit.

3. The first defendant resisted the suit by filing written statement contending that he has not borrowed any money as stated by the plaintiff and it was a blank cheque, it has been forged.

4. When the suit was pending, the first defendant had passed away. His wife,


















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