Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
N. SATHISH KUMAR
R. Rajendran, S/o. late C. Ramasamy – Appellant
Versus
K. Kullappan, S/o. Kurusamy – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. introduction of case details and parties (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. plaintiff's case and loan details (Para 3) |
| 3. defendant's denial and defense arguments (Para 4 , 5) |
| 4. trial court's decision and appeal arguments (Para 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13) |
| 5. burden of proof and presumption of consideration (Para 14 , 15 , 16) |
| 6. presumption of negotiation instrument's consideration (Para 22 , 23) |
| 7. court's decision on evidence (Para 24) |
| 8. issues of evidence and plaintiff's conduct (Para 26 , 30) |
JUDGMENT :
N. SATHISH KUMAR, J.
Challenging the judgement and decree dated 01.12.2021 made by the learned Principal District Judge, Tiruppur District, in O.S.No.34 of 2019, the defendant is before this Court with the present appeal suit. The suit was decreed against the appellant herein directing him to pay to the plaintiff, a sum of Rs.12,50,000/- with interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum from the date of plaint till date of decree and thereafter at 6% per annum till date of repayment in full and cost of Rs.67,764.50.
2. For the sake of convenience, the parties in this appeal suit will hereinafter be referred to as per their array in the original suit.
3. The case of the plaintiff in O.S.No.34 of
The court established that the burden of proof regarding consideration lies with the plaintiff, and the presumption under the Negotiable Instruments Act can be rebutted through circumstantial evidenc....
A promissory note must be supported by consideration and evidence; presumption of validity can be rebutted by proving lack of genuine financial transaction.
The presumption of consideration under Section 118 of the Act is a statutory presumption and unless it is rebutted, it has to be presumed that consideration has passed.
The presumption of consideration under the Negotiable Instruments Act applies to issued cheques, placing the burden on the defendant to prove otherwise.
The presumption of consideration under Section 118 of the Negotiable Instruments Act is rebuttable; both parties must substantiate claims regarding the nature and existence of consideration for legal....
The burden of proof to disprove the existence of consideration for a negotiable instrument lies with the Defendant, and the Plaintiff is entitled to the benefit of presumption under Section 118 of th....
The presumption of consideration under Section 118 of the Negotiable Instruments Act is rebuttable, and the defendant can discharge the burden of proof by demonstrating the improbability of considera....
The court found the plaintiff failed to establish the execution of the promissory note, concluding the presumption of consideration under Section 118 of the Negotiable Instruments Act could not be in....
The execution of a promissory note is presumed valid under Section 118 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, shifting the burden to the defendant to prove lack of consideration.
The execution of a promissory note establishes a legal presumption of consideration that the defendant must rebut; failure to do so results in judgment favoring the plaintiff.
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
