Law:

Section:

Negotiable Instruments Act (XXVI of 1881)-------Ss. 4 & 13---Stamp Act (II of 1899), S. 2(5)---Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), O.XXXVII, Rr. 2, 3 & O.VII, R.10---Suit for recovery of amount on basis of pro note---Return of plaint---Trial Court returned the plaint to the plaintiff for its presentation before the competent court of jurisdiction, holding that alleged promissory note on basis of which suit was filed was not a pro note, but was a bond--- Validity--- Money had been admitted by executant/defendant which was payable as per demand of the plaintiff---On the basis of said promissory note, the receipt regarding the payment of disputed money to the defendant had been acknowledged by marginal witnesses; and said document bore the signature of defendant---Document produced by the plaintiff was a pro note because it was expressly mentioned therein that suit amount would be paid to the plaintiff on his demand---From no score of interpretation or any law said promissory note could be considered as a bond---Defendant, as per contents of the promissory note was obliged to pay the amount as the same was a pro note and not a bond---Judgment and decree passed by the Trial Court were set aside and case was remanded to Appellate Court for disposal within four months. JUDGMENT KHALID MEHMOOD KHAN, J.---Through this regular first appeal, appellant has impugned the judgment/decree dated 29-10-2010 passed by learned Additional District Judge-VI, D.I. Khan vide which the plaint of appellant was returned to him for its presentation before Court of competent jurisdiction. 2. Short facts of the instant revision are that appellant/plaintiff filed a suit for recovery of Rs.1,00,000 against the respondent/defendant on the ground that the amount in question was paid by him to the respondent/defendant in the shape of loan and in this regard pro note, along with receipt was scribed on 30-5-2007. Thereafter when the appellant/plaintiff demanded to return the outstanding loan the respondent/defendant refused to return the same. 3. Respondent/defendant contested the suit and filed written statement, raised so many legal and factual objections on the maintainability of suit.…

Deprecated: trim(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 492