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

2013 Supreme(MP) 925

K.K.TRIVEDI
Neelam Kumar Bachani – Appellant
Versus
Bhishamlal – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellant: R.K. Pancholi
For the Respondents: Party-in-Person

JUDGMENT

This revision under section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure is directed against the order dated 10-10-2012, passed in Civil Suit No. 91-B/2012 by the First Additional Civil Judge, Class-II to the Court of First Civil Judge, Class-II, Bhopal, whereby the application filed by the applicants under Order 7, Rule 11 of Civil Procedure Code for dismissal of the suit as barred by law, has been rejected.

2. Facts in brief giving rise to filing of this revision are that the non-applicant/plaintiff filed a suit for recovery of Rs.1,50,000/- against the applicants/defendants, on the grounds that the non-applicant has paid Rs. 1,50,000/- by a cheque on 15-5-2009 to the applicants/defendants, as loan for the purposes of purchase of a shop situated at Bhopal Plaza, Bhopal Talkies Compound from one M/s. Balaji Associates. It was averred that the applicant No. 2 promised to return the said loan amount within a year. The cheque was given on 15-5-2009 which was got encashed on the same day. When the demand was made by the non-applicant for refund of amount of loan, the same was not repaid, therefore, a notice was issued to the applicants by non-applicant on 13-9-2011 through a counsel. In












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