Madras High Court
M.Abdul Hassan vs Surilinarayanasami Pethi Naidu on 3 April, 2025
Author: N.Sathish Kumar
Bench: N.Sathish Kumar
A.S.No.73 of 2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 03.04.2025
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE N.SATHISH KUMAR
A.S.No.73 of 2025 and
C.M.P.Nos.6532 & 7615 of 2025
M.Abdul Hassan ... Appellant/Defendant
-vs-
1. Surilinarayanasami Pethi Naidu
S/o. Pethi Naidu,
Having permanent address at:
No.1292, Hidden Lake Drive,
Bloomfield Hills,
Michigan – 48302,
United States
and Having Temporary Address at:
No.51, Butt Road, St.Thomas Mount,
Chennai-600 016.
Rep by his Power Agent
Mr.K.Suresh,
S/o.Mr.Prabhakaran,
Door No.766, 5th Block, 1st Floor,
Mugappair West, Chennai – 600 037 ... Respondent/Plaintiff
Prayer: Appeal Suit is filed under Section 96 of CPC to set aside the
judgment and decree dated 14.06.2023 in O.S.No.1698 of 2023 passed by
the Hon'ble XXIII Additional City Civil Court, Chennai, thereby
consequently allow I.A.No.4 of 2023 in O.S.No.1698 of 2023 and allow this
appeal.
For Appellant : Mr.C.Seethapathy
1/6
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 16/04/2025 12:43:00 pm )
A.S.No.73 of 2025
For Respondent : Mr.R.Balaguruswamy
*****
JUDGMENT
A challenge has been made to the judgment and decree of the
Trial Court, directing the defendant to pay Rs.16,45,583/- together with
interest @ 12% p.a. from the date of filing of this suit till the date of decree
and 6% interest from the date of decree till realization and also the
dismissal of the application filed under Order XXXVII Rule 5 of CPC.
2. Originally, a suit had been filed by the plaintiff for recovery
of a sum of Rs.16,45,583/-. It is the case of the plaintiff that the defendant
borrowed a sum of Rs.25,00,000/- as loan by way of Demand Draft on
21.05.2014. However, the amount has not been repaid and therefore, he
filed a suit for recovery of the amount with interest @ 12% p.a. and the said
suit was decreed in favour of the plaintiff.
3. During pendency of the suit, an application has been taken
out by the defendant / appellant herein, seeking leave of the Court to defend
the main suit. The main contention of the appellant before the Trial Court is
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 16/04/2025 12:43:00 pm )
that the amount has been paid towards purchase of land. As the respondent
has not completed the sale transaction, the amount has been repaid on
various installments and therefore, the question of payment of interest does
not arise at all. The Trial Court has rejected the contention and refused to
grant leave. Challenging the said order, the present appeal has been filed.
4. According to the appellant, there was a correspondence
between the parties, which clearly shows that there was an agreement for
purchase of land and the amount has been paid as per agreement only for
purchase of the property.
5. Whereas, learned counsel for the respondent contended that
as per email communication, which is sought to be filed under Order XLI
Rule 27 of CPC, it is only a loan transaction.
6. It is brought to the notice of this Court that both sides have
filed applications before this Court under Order XLI Rule 27 & 28 of CPC
for receipt of additional documents.
7. Considering the nature of submissions made on either side,
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 16/04/2025 12:43:00 pm )
this Court is of the view that the documents sought to be produced by both
the parties are required for the purpose of arriving a conclusive decision in
the matter as to whether it is only a loan transaction or the amount has been
paid towards purchase of the land. This Court is inclined to allow both
C.M.P.Nos.6532 & 7615 of 2025 filed to receive certain vital documents.
Accordingly, C.M.P.Nos.6532 & 7615 of 2025 are allowed in order to
render a substantial justice to the parties and the parties are directed to
produce those documents before the Trial Court and the Trial Court is
directed to accept the documents, subject to production of proof thereof
before it.
8. In such view of the matter, the instant Appeal Suit is
allowed. The judgment and decree dated 14.06.2023 in O.S.No.1698 of
2023 passed by the XXIII Additional City Civil Court, Chennai is set aside.
Consequently, the order passed in I.A.No.4 of 2023 in O.S.No.1698 of
2023, refusing to grant leave is also set aside and the matter is remanded to
the Trial Court to decide the application afresh. The Trial Court shall give
notice to both sides and thereafter, dispose of the application within a period
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 16/04/2025 12:43:00 pm )
of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. It is
reiterated that the additional documents sought to be filed shall be filed
before the Trial Court and the Trial Court shall receive those documents,
subject to verification of proof. It is made clear that in case the Trial Court
comes to the conclusion that the defendant is not entitled to any leave, in
such case, the summary judgment shall be passed afresh immediately.
Whereas, in the event of leave being granted in favour of the defendant, the
suit shall be disposed of on merits within three months thereafter. Registry
of this Court is directed to return all the original records to the Lower Court
forthwith. No costs.
03.04.2025
Index: Yes / No
Internet: Yes / No
ar
To:
1. The XXIII Additional City Civil Judge,
Chennai.
2. The Section Officer,
V.R.Section,
High Court,
Madras.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 16/04/2025 12:43:00 pm )
N.SATHISH KUMAR,J.,
ar
03.04.2025
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 16/04/2025 12:43:00 pm )
