defendant. The
contention that the plaintiff has prepared two draft documents and sent
the same to the defendant. This defendant had agreed for the same ... draft agreement Ex.B7,
dated 31.03.1984, which is not signed by any of the parties. Further, the
signing of the draft agreement has been
defendant. The
contention that the plaintiff has prepared two draft documents and sent
the same to the defendant. This defendant had agreed for the same ... draft agreement Ex.B7,
dated 31.03.1984, which is not signed by any of the parties. Further, the
signing of the draft agreement has been
defendant. The
contention that the plaintiff has prepared two draft documents and sent
the same to the defendant. This defendant had agreed for the same ... draft agreement Ex.B7,
dated 31.03.1984, which is not signed by any of the parties. Further, the
signing of the draft agreement has been
defendant. The
contention that the plaintiff has prepared two draft documents and sent
the same to the defendant. This defendant had agreed for the same ... draft agreement Ex.B7,
dated 31.03.1984, which is not signed by any of the parties. Further, the
signing of the draft agreement has been
recourse to drawers and/or bona fide holders, Draft(s) drawn by the Beneficiary and /or document(s) prsented under the Credit. A Credit should ... Credit nevertheless calls for Draft(s) on the Applicant, banks will consider such Draft(s) as an additional document(s).
b. A confirmation
Settlement Deeds, Exs.A2 and A3 were drafted by one Ramalingam, document writer.
25. It is the only contention of the defendants ... earlier documents executed. The Cancellation Deeds and Settlement Deeds were drafted by the same document writer and that itself clearly show that the same
recourse to drawers and/or bona fide holders, Draft(s) drawn by the Beneficiary and /or document(s) prsented under the Credit. A Credit should ... Credit nevertheless calls for Draft(s) on the Applicant, banks will consider such Draft(s) as an additional document(s).
b. A confirmation
made an attempt to serve the demand draft to the defendant. The conduct of taking the demand draft subsequent to the legal notice clearly indicate ... draft.
13. All these facts clearly indicate that the demand draft has been taken only for the purpose of the case to create some document
copy of the demand draft
Exhibits produced on the side of the defendants:
S.No.
Exhibits
Date
Description of documents
1.
D-1
26.09.2002
Certified ... also drafted by the Advocate of the plaintiff. He would have verified all the documents. Therefore, the contention put forth by the learned counsel
T.K.Karupannasamy vs Masilamani (Died) on 6 February, 2026
Author: N.Sathish Kumar
Bench
