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

1985 Supreme(All) 378

A.N.DIKSHITA
PHOOL CHAND – Appellant
Versus
MATA PALAT – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
A.S.DIVAKAR, I.A.KHAN

A. N. DIKSHITA, J.


( 1 ) THIS second appeal has been filed, by the defendant-appellant against the judgment and decree dated 31-5-76, passed by the District Judge, Azamgarh, dismissing the appeal filed by the appellant against the judgment and decree dated 5-3-1974 decreeing the plaintiffs suit for the recovery of Rs. 10335/- with future and pendente lite interest at the rate of 2% per annum.

( 2 ) A suit was filed by the plaintiff-respondent against the appellant on the allegation that the defendant-appellant had borrowed Rs. 9000/- from the plaintiff with interest at the rate of 1% per month on 15-4-1972 and had executed a pro note in his favour. As the amount was not paid the suit was filed. The defendant contested the suit on various grounds. The main allegation of the defendant was that no pro note was ever executed by him in favour of the plaintiff. During the trial of the suit the plaintiff examined himself besides the scribe of the pro note Radhey Shyam and the attesting witness Munni Lal, P. W. 3. Radhey Shyam testified the execution of the pro note while Munni Lal testified the borrowing of the amount and the execution of the pro note. As the defendant-appellant had denied






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