HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
K.RUKMANI – Appellant
Versus
K.S.PONNUSAMY GOUNDER – Respondent
AS 338/2010
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 04.10.2012
Coram:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G. RAJASURIA
A.S.No.338 of 2010
K.Rukmani
.. Appellant/Defendant
vs.
K.S.Ponnusamy Gounder
.. Respondent/Plaintiff
This Appeal is focussed as against the judgment and decree dated
26.11.2008 granted in O.S.No.330 of 2007 by the learned Additional
District Judge, Fast Track Court No.IV, Bhavani.
For appellant : Mr.A.S.Baalaji
For Respondent : Mr.P.M.Doraisamy
JUDGMENT
This appeal is focussed by the defendant animadverting upon the
judgment and decree dated 26.11.2008 passed in O.S.No.330 of 2007 by
the learned Additional District Judge, Fast Track Court No.IV,
Bhavani.
2. The parties are referred to hereunder according to their
litigative status and ranking before the trial Court.
3. Compendiously and concisely the germane facts absolutely
necessary for the disposal of this appeal would run thus:
(a) The respondent/plaintiff filed the suit for recovery of a
sum of Rs.6,49,600/-, based on two suit promissory notes.
(b) Challenging and impugning the genuineness of the suit pr
notes, the defendant filed the written statement resisting the suit
and denying the liability.
(c) Up went the trial, wherein, the plaintiff-Ponnusamy Gounder
examined himself as P.W.1 along with P.Ws.2 and 3 and Exs.A1 to A7
were marked; the defendant-Rukmani examined herself as D.W.1 along
with D.Ws.2 to 4 and Exs.B1 to B10 were marked.
https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/
(d) Ultimately the trial Court decreed the suit.
4. Being aggrieved by and dissatisfied with the same, this
appeal has been filed on various grounds.
5. The gist and kernel of the case of the plaintiff as stood
evinced from the plaint would run thus:
The defendant on 21.11.2004, borrowed a sum of Rs.2,10,000/-from
the plaintiff and executed the first suit promissory note undertaking
to repay the sum with 12% interest per annum on demand. Subsequently
on 19.05.2005, the defendant borrowed once again a sum of
Rs.2,80,000/- from the plaintiff and executed the second suit
promissory note. Inasmuch as there was default in repayment of the
loan amounts, the notice Ex.A3 was issued on 31.07.2007 by the
plaintiff, for nothing but to get a reply from the defendant denying
her liability. Whereupon the suit was filed.
6. Per contra, the defendant in a bid to torpedo and pulverise
the contentions as put forth and set forth on the side of the
plaintiff, filed the written statement, the gist and kernel of it
would run thus:
The defendant borrowed only a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- from the
plaintiff. Thereafter, because the plaintiff insisted for furnishing
security for the prompt repayment of the said sum, at his behest and
compulsion, an agreement to sell emerged between the plaintiff and a
third party Kali Gounder concerning the defendant's immovable
property. Subsequently the plaintiff through Kali Gounder filed the
suit O.S.No.95 of 2003 for specific performance of such agreement.
Wherefore, subsequently there was no possibility or probability of
the defendant twice borrowing such huge amounts of Rs.2,10,000/- and
Rs.2,80,000/- from the plaintiff and executing the two suit pro
notes. At the time of lending the sum of Rs.1,00,000/- itself, the
plaintiff got as many as 15 blank pronote formats signed by the
defendant and her family members and accordingly, she would pray for
the dismissal of the suit.
7. The learned counsel for the appellant/plaintiff inviting the
attention of this Court to Exs.B1 to B9, would pyramid his argument,
which could pithily and precisely be set out thus:
Exs.B1 to B9 no doubt were filed after examination of P.W.1.
Those exhibits were marked during the chief examination of D.W.1.
The Advocate for the plaintiff simply cross examined suggesting as
though all those documents were cooked up ones, purely for the
purpose of defending th
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.