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

1969 Supreme(Ori) 24

G.K.MISRA
AINTHA SWAIN – Appellant
Versus
NILAKANTHA BISWAL – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
J.Behera, M.MOHANTY, R.C.PATNAIK, R.N.MISRA

G. K. MISRA, J.

( 1 ) THE plaintiff's suit was for recovery of money on the strength of a promissory note Ext. 1 executed by the defendant on 28-1-62. The defendant admitted the execution of the promissory note. He however contended that no consideration passed thereunder and that it was given by way of a security on behalf of his brother-in-law who was alleged to have committed theft and was called upon to execute a promissory note. The case underwent trial. The plaintiff's suit was dismissed by the trial court. The plaintiff accordingly filed an appeal. Arguments in the appeal were heard by the learned Subordinate Judge, Bhubaneswar and he reserved the judgment to 25-9-67. On that day the defendant filed an application for amendment of the written statement alleging that in paragraph 11 of the written statement the year "1963" was a mistake for "1962" and that as it escaped the notice of the defendant by inadvertence, it should be allowed to be corrected. The learned Subordinate Judge accepted the defendant's contention that the mistake was a bona fide one and escaped the notice of the defendant. He however held that the amendment should not be allowed as it might affect the pla




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