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

2022 Supreme(Mad) 1144

R. VIJAYAKUMAR
K. Ramakrishnan – Appellant
Versus
P. Kandasamy – Respondent


Advocates appeared:
For the Appellant:M. Saravanan, R. Subramani, Advocates. For the Respondent:Babu Rajendran, R. Murugesan, Advocates.

JUDGMENT

(Prayer: Second Appeal is filed under Section 100 of C.P.C, to set aside the judgment and decree of the lower Appellate Court dated 26.10.2017 passed in A.S.No.47 of 2018 on the file of the VI Additional District Court, Madurai, modifying the judgment and decree of the trial Court dated 23.06.2017 passed in O.S.No.713 of 2015 on the file of the Principal Subordinate Court, Madurai.)

1. The defendant is the appellant.

2. The plaintiff filed O.S.No.713 of 2015 before the Principal Subordinate Court, Madurai for recovery of money of Rs.2,50,000/- along with interest at the rate of 24% per annum based upon a pro-note said to have been executed by the defendant on 10.10.2012. The suit was dismissed by the trial Court. The plaintiff filed A.S.No.47 of 2017 before the VI Additional District Court, Madurai. The learned District Judge was pleased to reverse the judgment and decree of the trial Court and granted a decree in favour of the plaintiff. As against the same, the present second appeal has been filed by the defendant.

3. The plaintiff has contended that he is doing pawn broker business and money lending business and he is having license for doing the said businesses. According

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