Duraimurugan vs M.Rajendran — 28/2024
Case under Codeofcivilprocedure Section Or 7 r 1. Disposed: Contested--Decreed with cost on 08th April 2026.
OS - Original Suit
CNR: TNTV140001512024
Filing Number
95/2024
Filing Date
24-06-2024
Registration No
28/2024
Registration Date
27-06-2024
Court
SubCourt, Thiruthuraipoondi
Judge
4-Subordinate Judge
Decision Date
08th April 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--Decreed with cost
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Duraimurugan
Adv. Thiru.T.P.S.Manikannan., M.Com.,B.L.,
Respondent(s)
M.Rajendran
R. kasthuri
Hearing History
Judge: 4-Subordinate Judge
Disposed
Judgement
Arguments
Arguments
Evidence
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 08-04-2026 | Disposed |
| 01-04-2026 | Judgement |
| 26-03-2026 | Arguments |
| 13-03-2026 | Arguments |
| 09-03-2026 | Evidence |
Final Orders / Judgements
Case Summary: Duraimurugan v. M. Rajendran and R. Kasthuri (28/2024) Decision: The court decreed the suit in favor of petitioner Duraimurugan, ordering defendants M. Rajendran and R. Kasthuri to pay Rs. 3,55,529 (principal of Rs. 3,00,000 plus interest) with 12% post-judgment interest until verdict date and 6% thereafter until payment. Key Reasoning: The court found that the defendants validly executed a promissory note on 10.12.2022 acknowledging receipt of Rs. 3,00,000 as loan with agreed monthly interest. Under Section 118 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, execution of a promissory note creates a presumption of consideration received, which the defendants failed to rebut with credible evidence. The court rejected defendants' contradictory claims about receiving money from a third party instead. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Interim Orders
Case Summary: Duraimurugan v. M. Rajendran and R. Kasthuri (28/2024) Decision: The court decreed the suit in favor of petitioner Duraimurugan, ordering defendants M. Rajendran and R. Kasthuri to pay Rs. 3,55,529 (principal of Rs. 3,00,000 plus interest) with 12% post-judgment interest until verdict date and 6% thereafter until payment. Key Reasoning: The court found that the defendants validly executed a promissory note on 10.12.2022 acknowledging receipt of Rs. 3,00,000 as loan with agreed monthly interest. Under Section 118 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, execution of a promissory note creates a presumption of consideration received, which the defendants failed to rebut with credible evidence. The court rejected defendants' contradictory claims about receiving money from a third party instead. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts