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

1976 Supreme(Online)(All) 7

ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
unknown, J
Ch. Birbal Singh v. Harphool Khan and Another


Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: undefined
For the Respondents: undefined

Table of Content
1. plaintiff's appeal for recovery based on a pronote. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4)
2. execution and consideration must be proven by the plaintiff. (Para 5 , 6 , 7)
3. denial leads to no presumption of admission. (Para 8 , 9 , 10)
4. court upheld initial judgment dismissing the appeal. (Para 11 , 12)

1. This is a plaintiff's second appeal against the judgment and decree dated 27th April, 1966, passed by the learned District Judge, Meerut, dismissing his suit for the recovery of Rs. 1500/-.

2. The plaintiff - appellant had filed a suit for the recovery of Rs. 1,500/- on the basis of a pronote and a receipt dated 11-6-1962 for Rs. 1,000/- alleged to have been executed by the defendants and carrying an interest at the rate of one and a half per cent per mensem. Nothing was said to have been paid towards this loan.

3. The defendant No. 1 alone contested the suit, inter alia, on the grounds that the defendants neither borrowed any amount nor executed the pronote and the receipt in suit; that the plaintiff had to get a joint wall of the parties re - constructed and the defendants were to bear half costs. In that connection the plaintiff obtained their thumb impressions on blank papers.










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