Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
N.SATHISH KUMAR, R.SAKTHIVEL
D. Ravikumar – Appellant
Versus
S.L. Sakthivel Raja – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. plaintiff's financial transaction with first defendant (Para 1 , 3 , 4) |
| 2. first defendant claims suit is abuse of process (Para 5 , 6 , 7) |
| 3. discussion of privity, established lending and limitations (Para 9 , 10) |
| 4. court’s reasoning on evidence and conduct of parties (Para 11 , 12 , 13) |
| 5. appeal allowed, original decree dismissed (Para 15) |
JUDGMENT :
N. SATHISH KUMAR, J.
1. Aggrieved over the judgment and decree of the Trial Court decreeing the suit for recovery of sum of Rs.37,99,500/- to the plaintiff with interest @ 12 per annum on Rs.22,35,000/- from the date of plaint till the date of judgment and at the rate of 6% on Rs.22,350,000/- per annum from the date of judgment till the date of realisation, the present appeal is filed by the defendant.
2. The parties herein are arrayed to as per their own ranking before the Trial Court.
3. Brief facts in filing this appeal are as follows:-
a. The plaintiff is a tenant under the first defendant. The plaintiff is retired from the Indian Air Force. Both of them were well acquainted over years and on account of the acquittance, there was some financial transaction between the plaintiff and the first defendant. The first defen
The plaintiff failed to establish a valid loan transaction with supporting evidence, resulting in the dismissal of the suit and appeal.
Suit for recovery based on promissory note is barred by limitation after three years and oral evidence alone cannot prove guarantee or payment without supporting documents.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the suit was barred by limitation under Article 113 of the Limitation Act, 1963, as the right to sue accrued when the defendants committed bre....
An admission of signature on a negotiable instrument creates a legal presumption of consideration, which must be rebutted effectively by the defendant.
The plaintiff's lawful ownership and entitlement to recovery of possession were established, and the defendants' possession was found to be unlawful.
The limitation period for filing a suit for specific performance starts from the date of refusal of performance, not from the execution date of the agreement.
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
