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

2022 Supreme(Mad) 3391

P. T. ASHA
N. Ramalingam – Appellant
Versus
M. Ramalingam – Respondent


Advocates appeared:
For the Appellant:R. Meenal, Advocate. For the Respondent:D. Shivakumaran, Advocate.

JUDGMENT

(Prayer: Second Appeal is filed under Section 100 of C.P.C against the judgment and decree dated 24.09.2013 in A.S.No.3 of 2013 on the file of the III Additional District and Sessions Court, Cuddalore, Vridhachalam confirming the judgment and decree dated 24.08.2011 in O.S.No.54 of 2010 before the Additional Sub Court, Vridhachalam.)

1. The unsuccessful defendant before the Courts below in a suit filed for recovery of money under a promissory note is the appellant before this Court.

2. The facts necessary for disposing of the second appeal are herein below narrated and the parties are referred to in the same litigative status as before the Courts below:

Plaintiff's case:

The plaintiff had filed the suit O.S.No.54 of 2010 on the file of the Additional Subordinate Court, Virudhachalam for recovery of a sum of Rs.1,37,106/- with costs and subsequent interest. It is the case of the plaintiff that the defendant had borrowed a sum of Rs.54,000/- from one Latha, W/o. Kuzhanthaivel on 07.04.2007 and had executed a promissory note agreeing to repay the amount with interest @ 12% per annum and once again another sum of a like amount was honoured on 11.04.2007 for which another promissory

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