Nunna Srinivasa Rao v. Kanumuri Veeraswami
Case at a glance
Outcome
Dismissed
Hence, both the revision petitions are dismissed
Provisions considered
- Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 O. XVI rr. 1, 2
Judgment
Cause title
Nunna Srinivasa Rao AND Kanumuri Veeraswami CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.4087 of 2007 Between: Nunna Srinivasa Rao AND Kanumuri Veeraswami ..... PETITIONER(S)
RESPONDENT(S)
PETITIONER(S)
RESPONDENT(S)
HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE B.PRAKASH RAO CIVIL REVISION PETITION Nos.4036 and 4087 of 2007
COMMON ORDER:
Operative part
Since these two revisions virtually involve common question, they are being taken up together for disposal. The petitioner in these two revisions is the defendant in different suits filed by the respondent. These revisions have been filed against the orders rejecting the applications filed by the petitioner under Order XVI Rules 1 and 2 of C.P.C. to summon the Branch Manager of State Bank of India (ADB), Addanki, to produce the statements of account, cash vouchers, etc. The Court below, by taking into account the burden of proving the pronote as genuine is on the respondent/plaintiff, irrespective of the defence taken by the petitioner/defendant regarding the alleged joint business, dismissed those applications. Having regard to the observation made by the Court below, I do not see any reason to interfere with the discretion exercised by the Court below. Hence, both the revision petitions are dismissed. No costs. ____________________ B.PRAKASH RAO, J 24th June, 2010 CVRK
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: Hence, both the revision petitions are dismissed
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 — O. XVI rr. 1, 2.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.