Back
HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
VENUTHURUMALLI GOPALA KRISHNA RAO, J
M /S. KISHORE BOILED RICE MILL, REP BY ITS MANAGING PARTNER, DEVATHU MUSALA RAO – Appellant
Versus
P UVVADA PULLAIAH, DIED PER LRS RR 2 TO 6 – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. plaintiff's claim for recovery based on a promissory note. (Para 1 , 2 , 4) |
| 2. defendants' denial of the promissory note's validity. (Para 5 , 6 , 8) |
| 3. arguments regarding the authenticity of the promissory note. (Para 10 , 11) |
| 4. burden of proof lies with the plaintiff to establish claims. (Para 12 , 13 , 14) |
| 5. witness testimonies corroborate the execution of the promissory note. (Para 16 , 17 , 18) |
| 6. standards for proof and credibility of witness testimony. (Para 22 , 24 , 26) |
| 7. trial court's judgment affirmed; appeal dismissed. (Para 33 , 34) |
JUDGMENT: -
This Appeal, under Section 96 of the Code of Civil Procedure [for short ‘the C.P.C.’], is filed by the Appellants/defendants challenging the Decree and Judgment, dated 28.01.2008, in O.S. No.262 of 2002 passed by the learned Additional Senior Civil Judge, Ongole [for short ‘the trial Court’]. The first Respondent herein is the plaintiff in the said Suit.
Sole respondent/ plaintiff died during the pendency of the appeal, his legal representatives are brought on record as respondent Nos.2 to 7.
2. The respondent/plaintiff filed a Suit for recovery of a sum of Rs.7,32,394/- being the principal and interest due on a p
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
