A second appeal was filed by the 1st defendant against a decree for Rs.1.71 lakh based on a joint promissory note. The appellant failed to rebut the presumption of debt under Section 118 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. Finding no substantial question of law, the court dismissed the appeal.
The second appeal was dismissed with no order as to costs.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH SECOND APPEAL NO :411 of 2011
JUDGMENT:
The appellant is the 1st defendant, who suffered a decree dated 20.8.2004 in O.S.No.262 of 2002 on the file of the Senior Civil Judge, Gajuwada, for payment of a sum of Rs.1,71,133/- together with subsequent interest at the rate of 6% p.a., on principal sum of Rs.1,00,000/- from the date of suit till date of realization and also to pay costs of Rs.9948/-. Aggrieved by the said judgment, the appellant herein filed A.S.No.519 of 2004 on the file of the VIII Additional District & Sessions Judge (FTC), Visakhapatnam. The lower appellate Court confirmed the judgment of the Court below.
The 1st respondent is the plaintiff, who filed the above suit based on the promissory note executed by the 2nd respondent and the appellant jointly, having borrowed a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- from the plaintiff.
The plaintiff examined himself as P.W.1 and examined the attestor and scribe of the promissory note as P.Ws.2 and 3 respectively and got marked the promissory note as Ex.A1. The 1st defendant alone was examined as D.W.1 and no documents were marked.
As the suit promissory note was proved and as the defendant failed to rebut the presumptions arising under section 118 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, the suit was decreed. Having regard to the entire oral and documentary evidence, the lower appellate Court confirmed the decree passed by the lower Court. In view of the concurrent findings of both the Courts below, I do not see any substantial question of law that arises for consideration in this appeal and hence, the appeal is liable to be dismissed.
In the result, the second appeal is dismissed. No order as to
costs.
_________________ Justice V. Eswaraiah Dated: 15.4.2011 Nn.
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH
SECOND APPEAL NO :411 of 2011
15.4.2011
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the plaintiff proved the debt through a promissory note and whether the defendant rebutted the presumptions under Section 118 of the Negotiable Instruments Act.
Whether any substantial question of law arose to warrant interference with the decree passed by the lower courts.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
1st Defendant/Appellant
Plaintiff/1st Respondent
2nd Respondent
Justice V. Eswaraiah
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
