TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Supreme Court upholds judgment modifying mortgage decree, credits defendants, and rejects plaintiffs' claim.</h1> The Supreme Court affirmed the High Court's judgment, dismissing the appeal and confirming the modification of the mortgage decree to credit the ... - Issues Involved:1. Whether the first defendant made a payment of Rs. 19,000/- on 31 December 1953 and made an endorsement on the mortgage bond in respect of the said payment.2. Whether the defendants on 12 January 1955 acknowledged liability for Rs. 26,000/- as alleged by the plaintiffs or for Rs. 2,600/- as alleged by the defendants.Detailed Analysis:Issue 1: Payment of Rs. 19,000/- on 31 December 1953The plaintiffs instituted a suit for the recovery of Rs. 27,995-11-0 based on a mortgage bond dated 1 January 1948. The defendants claimed they made a payment of Rs. 19,000/- on 31 December 1953, which was endorsed on the mortgage bond but not credited by the plaintiffs. The plaintiffs denied this payment and endorsement, alleging tampering by the defendants.The defendants were allowed to examine the mortgage bond and claimed that the plaintiffs had obliterated the endorsement of Rs. 19,000/- and replaced it with a Marwari script endorsement. The High Court found that the endorsement had been effectively obliterated, likely using chemicals, and that the plaintiffs' story of erasure could not be accepted. The oral evidence, contemporaneous books of account, and the obliteration of the writing supported the defendants' claim of payment. The High Court concluded that the defendants had indeed paid Rs. 19,000/- on 31 December 1953.Issue 2: Acknowledgement of Liability for Rs. 26,000/- or Rs. 2,600/- on 12 January 1955The plaintiffs alleged that on 12 January 1955, the first defendant acknowledged a debt of Rs. 26,000/- on the mortgage bond. The defendants contended that the acknowledgment was for Rs. 2,600/-. The endorsement in question was in Telugu, with the digits in English. The plaintiffs claimed the endorsement was tampered with, changing Rs. 26,000/- to Rs. 2,600/-.The High Court found that the endorsement for Rs. 26,000/- was not credible, given the proven payment of Rs. 19,000/- on 31 December 1953. The endorsement for Rs. 2,600/- was consistent with the defendants' evidence and the contemporaneous books of account. The plaintiffs' documents and letters relied upon to support their claim were either not inter-parties, not relevant, or not shown to the defendants during cross-examination, thus lacking probative value.The High Court upheld the defendants' contentions, modifying the mortgage decree to give the defendants credit for the Rs. 19,000/- paid on 31 December 1953. The appeal was dismissed with costs.Conclusion:The Supreme Court affirmed the High Court's judgment, dismissing the appeal and confirming the modification of the mortgage decree to credit the defendants for the Rs. 19,000/- payment made on 31 December 1953. The endorsement of liability for Rs. 2,600/- on 12 January 1955 was upheld as genuine, rejecting the plaintiffs' claim of Rs. 26,000/-.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
