V.Natarajan v. G.Kamaraj
Negotiable Instruments Act, S.118 – Presumptions as to negotiable instruments – Promissory note suit for Rs.90,000/- – Execution denied by both defendants
Case brief
What is this about?
Second Appeal (S.100 CPC) — promissory note execution denied — S.118 NI Act presumptions (consideration, date, holder in due course) — handwriting/private expert opinion on signatures — burden of proof shifting to plaintiff on denial of execution and on discharge by defendants — proof of passing of consideration — absence of plaint particulars and account statements — additional evidence/admission of documents in second appeal (M.P.(MD)No.1 of 2011) — antecedent S.138 NI Act criminal case C.C.No.176 of 2004 withdrawn via Cr.M.P.No.647 of 2006 — recovery of money suit — Virudhunagar courts — Madurai Bench of Madras High Court — decrees of trial and first appellate courts set aside.
What did the court decide?
Second appeal allowed: all substantial questions of law answered in favour of the defendants/appellants; the Judgment and Decree dated 30.07.2010 in A.S.No.6 of 2009 (Additional District Judge, Fast Track Court, Virudhunagar) and the Decree and Judgment dated 30.10.2008 in O.S.No.8 of 2005 (Subordinate Judge, Virudhunagar) set aside; no costs; M.P.(MD)No.1 of 2011 (additional documents) allowed; M.P.(MD)Nos.2 and 3 of 2011 closed; the appellant permitted to withdraw 25% of the decreed amount deposited before the Subordinate Court, Virudhunagar, with accrued interest, if available.