Back
R. HEMALATHA
P. Sundareswar – Appellant
Versus
Pinky Jain – Respondent
JUDGMENT
(Prayer: Second Appeal filed under Section 100 CPC, 1908 against the decree and judgment dated 16.11.2009 passed in A.S. No.251 of 2007 on the file of the Additional District & Sessions Court (Fast Track Court No.III), Chennai, reversing the decree and judgment dated 25.10.2006 passed in O.S. No.3107 of 2003, on the file of the XIII Assistant City Civil Court, Chennai.)
1. The appellant is the defendant in O.S. No.3107 of 2003 on the file of the XIII Assistant Judge, City Civil Court, Chennai. The plaintiff filed the said suit for recovery of a sum of Rs.75,933/- due on a pro-note together with interest @ 30% per annum on the principal of Rs.40,000/- from the date of plaint till the date of realisation.
2. For the sake of convenience, the parties are referred to as per their ranking in the trial court and at appropriate places, their rank in the present appeal would also be indicated.
3. The case of the plaintiff is that the defendant borrowed a sum of Rs.40,000/- on 10.06.2000 from him and executed a pro-note (Ex.A2) promising to repay the principal together with interest at the rate of 30% per annum on his demand or to his order. His further contention is that though it was
The burden of proof shifts to the defendant if the plaintiff proves the execution of the pro-note. Admissibility of private handwriting expert's opinion under Order XXVI Rule 10 CPC.
The signature of the maker of a promissory note must be proven for the presumptions under the Negotiable Instruments Act to apply; if the signature is disputed and found to be forged, the note is inv....
A court cannot blindly accept the report of a handwriting expert. The expert must furnish the necessary criteria for deciding the accuracy of his conclusion, enabling the court to form its own indepe....
The plaintiff proved the execution of the pro-note and discharged the initial burden of proof, entitling them to a decree for recovery of money.
The burden of proof shifts to the defendant when the court finds that the disputed signatures match the admitted signature. Failure to examine a key witness may not be fatal to the plaintiff's case.
The courts affirmed the validity of a promissory note based on direct evidence, emphasizing that expert testimony is weak and should not override substantive evidence.
The defendant's evidence rebutting the presumption under Section 118 of the Negotiable Instrument Act and the plaintiff's obligation to maintain account books under the Tamil Nadu Money Lenders Act w....
Court deemed the execution of the pronote unproven due to insufficient evidence by the plaintiff and reliance on expert evidence favoring the defendant.
The court emphasized that ocular evidence, such as the testimony of witnesses, can outweigh the opinion of a handwriting expert. The court held that the plaintiff's evidence, including the validity o....
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
