Madras High Court
Tamilselvi vs G.Sivamani on 10 February, 2021
CRP.NPD.No.2295 of 2015
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 10.02.2021
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN
CRP.NPD.No.2295 of 2015 and
MP.No.1 of 2015
1.Tamilselvi
2.R.Mani ..Petitioners
Vs.
G.Sivamani ..Respondent
PRAYER:
The Civil Revision Petition is filed under Section 115 of Code of
Civil Procedure against the order and decree dated 05.12.2014 passed
in IA.No.13867 of 2014 in OS.No.2954 of 2014 on the file of VIII
Assistant City Civil Court, Chennai.
For Petitioners : Mr.C.Subramanian
For Respondent : Mr.Yoganand
for M/s.CPG Yoganand & Assts.
ORDER
This civil revision petition is directed as against the order
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
CRP.NPD.No.2295 of 2015
and decree dated 05.12.2014 passed in IA.No.13867 of 2014 in
OS.No.2954 of 2014 on the file of VIII Assistant City Civil Court,
Chennai thereby dismissing the petition for leave to defend.
2. The petitioners are the defendants. The respondent is the
plaintiff who filed suit for recovery of money on the pronote. While
pending the suit, the petitioners filed petition for leave to defend. The
case of the plaintiff is that the petitioners approached respondent on
01.05.2011 and requested for a loan of Rs.4,00,000/-. The first
petitioner also promised to repay the same with interest at the rate of
36% per annum within a period of six months. Believing the words, the
respondent disbursed loan of Rs.4 lakhs on 04.05.2011 by way of cheque.
On the same day, the petitioners herein executed pronote in favour of
the respondent herein. In fact on the same day, she also executed letter
of undertaking to return the amount with interest at the rate of 36% per
annum within a period of six months. Thereafter on 15.10.2011, the
respondent issued letter stating that while borrowing loan, the petitioner
executed letter of undertaking dated 04.05.2011 thereby undertook to
register the sale deed in favour of the respondent herein and the
remaining amount will be paid as such by the letter dated 15.10.2011
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
CRP.NPD.No.2295 of 2015
sent by the respondent. Thereafter on 18.12.2011, again the first
petitioner's husband undertakes to register sale deed and remaining
amount will be paid for which the petitioner is also liable. Thereafter the
petitioners did not register any sale deed and also did not repay the loan
borrowed by them.
3. Whereas the case of the petitioners is that the petitioner
borrowed a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- in the year 2010 and the same was
repaid in the year 2011 itself with exorbitant interest. At the time of
borrowing the said loan, the respondent obtained signature in the
pronote as well as blank papers. In fact, they also received cheques
executed by her husband. Even after repayment of the entire loan
amount with exorbitant interest, the respondent used to demand more
money and had given torture to the petitioners. Therefore, the
petitioners lodged complaint on 29.04.2014 on the file of the Inspector
of Police, Poonamallee Police Station, Tiruvallur District. On receipt of
the same, the petitioners were also issued CSR on 29.04.2014.
Thereafter the Inspector of Police also conducted enquiry. In the
enquiry, the respondent appeared and while pending enquiry, the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
CRP.NPD.No.2295 of 2015
respondent caused notice on 04.05.2014 and filed suit.
4. Even then, the court below dismissed the petition for leave
to defend on the ground that the petitioners failed to prove the loan
amount of Rs.2,00,000/- borrowed in the year 2010 and the same was
repaid to the respondent herein. Further, the undertaking letter which
was marked as Ex.R2 and 3 signed by the petitioner and also she
executed pronote which was marked as Ex.R1 for the loan amount of
Rs.4,00,000/-. Further, the cheques issued for various sums were also
marked as Ex.R8 to R11. Those documents prove the case of the
respondent and dismissed the petition for leave to defend. The court
below failed to consider the complaint lodged by the petitioner and she
was also issued CSR. While pending enquiry, the respondent caused legal
notice. Therefore, there are triable issues in the defence made by the
petitioners herein and the trial court ought to have given opportunity to
the petitioners to defend their case.
5. In view of the above discussion, the order and decree dated
05.12.2014 passed in IA.No.13867 of 2014 in OS.No.2954 of 2014 on
the file of VIII Assistant City Civil Court, Chennai are set aside.
Consequently, the judgment and decree passed in OS.No.2954 of 2014
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
CRP.NPD.No.2295 of 2015
dated 05.12.2014 on the file of VIII Assistant City Civil Court, Chennai
are also set aside. The petitioners are directed to file written statement
within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this
order. The trial court is directed to dispose of the suit within a period of
six months from the date of receipt of copy of this order.
6. With the above directions, this civil revision petition is
allowed. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed. No
order as to costs.
10.02.2021
Speaking/Non-speaking order
Index : Yes/No
Internet : Yes/No
lok
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
CRP.NPD.No.2295 of 2015
G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN,J.
lok
To
The VIII Assistant City Civil Court,
Chennai.
CRP.NPD.No.2295 of 2015
10.02.2021
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
