Madras High Court
Mrs.K.Vijayakumari vs Mr.K.Subramanian on 24 November, 2023
Author: N.Sathish Kumar
Bench: N.Sathish Kumar
C.S.NO.35 OF 2018
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 24.11.2023
CORAM
THE HON`BLE MR.JUSTICE N.SATHISH KUMAR
C.S.NO.35 OF 2018
Mrs.K.Vijayakumari .. Plaintiff
VS.
Mr.K.Subramanian .. Defendant
PRAYER: Civil Suit filed under Order IV Rule 1 of High Court Original
Side Rules 1956 read with Order VII Rule 1 of Civil Procedure Code for the
following reliefs :
(a) Directing the defendant to pay a sum of Rs.1,66,00,000/-
(Rupees One Crore Sixty Six Lakhs Only);
(b) Directing the defendant to pay interest @ 24% on
Rs.1,00,00,000/- (Rupees One Crore Only) from the date of plaint i.e.,
30.11.2017 till the date of the decree and thereafter, at the same rate, till the
date of realization;
(c) Directing the defendant to pay the costs of the suit.
For Plaintiff : Ms.R.V.Gayathri
For Defendant : Set exparte
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.S.NO.35 OF 2018
JUDGMENT
The Suit has been filed for recovery of the amount of
Rs.1,66,00,000/- (Rupees One Crore Sixty Six Lakhs Only) with interest.
2.It is the case of the plaintiff that the defendant has borrowed a
sum of Rs.2,00,00,000/- (Rupees Two Crore Only) from the plaintiff and
executed two promissory notes each for a sum of Rs.1,00,00,000/- on
01.03.2015. The plaintiff has already filed a Suit in respect of one of the
promissory notes in C.S.No.873 of 2016 and the present Suit is filed after
obtaining leave from this Court. Despite the legal notice dated 30.09.2016,
the amount has not been paid by the defendant. Hence, the present Suit.
3.Despite service of notice, the defendant remained exparte and
set exparte.
4.On the side of the plaintiff, plaintiff was examined as P.W.1
and Exs-P.1 to P.3 were marked. P.W.1 spoken about the nature of the
transaction and the amount advanced to the defendant and also spoken about
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.S.NO.35 OF 2018
the execution of the promissory notes by the defendant. Ex-P.1 is the original
promissory note between the defendant and the plaintiff dated 01.03.2015;
Ex-P.2 is the office copy of the notice sent by the plaintiff's counsel to the
defendant dated 30.09.2016; Ex-P.3 is the xerox copy of the acknowledgment
card from the defendant to the plaintiff's counsel dated 01.10.2016.
5.The documents and the execution of the promissory notes
remains un-challenged. In the absence of any rebuttal evidence, the plaintiff
has to succeed the Suit. Therefore, this Court is of the view that the plaintiff is
entitled to a decree as prayed for. Accordingly, the Suit is decreed as prayed
for with subsequent interest @ 6% per annum from the date of decree till the
date of realization with costs.
24.11.2023
Index : Yes/No
Neutral Citation: Yes/No
Speaking / Non-speaking order
TK
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.S.NO.35 OF 2018
LIST OF WITNESSES EXAMINED ON THE SIDE OF THE PLAINTIFF
P.W.1 – K.Vijayakumari
LIST OF DOCUMENTS MARKED ON THE SIDE OF THE PLAINTIFF
Sl.No. Exhibits Description of documents Date
1 P-1 Original promissory note between the defendant and 01.03.2015
the plaintiff
2 P-2 Office copy of the notice sent by the plaintiff's counsel 30.09.2016
to the defendant
3 P-3 Xerox copy of the A.D. Card from the defendant to 01.10.2016
the plaintiff's counsel
LIST OF WITNESSES EXAMINED ON THE SIDE OF THE DEFENDANT – NIL
24.11.2023
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.S.NO.35 OF 2018
N.SATHISH KUMAR, J.
TK
C.S.NO.35 OF 2018
24.11.2023
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
