Smt. A. Geetha Vani, PJCJ, ATP

In the Court of the Principal Junior Civil Judge,

Anantapuramu

Present: Smt. A. Geetha Vanee,

Prl. Junior Civil Judge, Anantapuramu.

Tuesday the 27 th day of February, 2018

O.S.No.776/2017

Between:-

C.Sree Ramulu, S/o C.Mallanna, Hindu, aged about 60 years, Retired Teacher, residing at Door No.12-2- 129-1, Ashok Nagar, Ananthapuramu town and District …Plaintiff.

AND

K.Mallikarjuna, S/o K.Ramudu, Hindu, aged about 45 years, working as School Assistant, Z.P. High School, Illuru village, Garladinne Mandal, Ananthapuramu district, resident of Flat No.401, Datta Towers, Aravind Nagar, Ananthapuramu town and district …Defendant.

This suit coming on this day for final hearing before me in the presence of Sri. K.Nagi Reddy, Advocate for the Plaintiff and the

Defendant has been called absent and remained Exparte, upon hearing and having perused the material on record and this court delivered the following:-

: : J U D G E M E N T : :

1) The suit is filed U/O VII Rule 1 and 2 CPC on behalf of the Plaintiff by the counsel for Plaintiff against Defendant for recovery of amount basing on promissory note.

2) The averments of the plaint in brief are as follows:

That on 22.9.2015, the Defendant borrowed a sum of Rs.74,000/- from the Plaintiff and executed the suit promissory note in favour of the

Plaintiff, agreeing to repay the same with interest at the rate of 24% per annum on the same day. Thereafter, in spite of repeated demands, the

Defendant failed to repay the suit amount. Hence, the Plaintiff is

OS No.776/2017 Page 2 of 3 PJCJ Court, Atp

constrained to file the suit against the Defendant for recovery of suit amount.

3) The Defendant remained exparte.

4) The Plaintiff is examined as PW1 and got marked Ex.A1 on behalf of the Plaintiff.

5) Heard arguments of the counsel for the Plaintiff.

Now the points that arise for determination are :

1) Whether the Plaintiff is entitled for the suit amount as prayed for ?

2) To what relief?

Point No.1:-

6) PW1- C.Sree Ramulu deposed that he filed his chief affidavit in lieu of his chief examination that the Defendant borrowed a sum of

Rs.74,000/- on 22.9.2015 from the Plaintiff, executed a promissory note in his favour, agreeing to repay the same with interest at the rate of 24% per annum. In spite of repeated demands, the Defendant failed to repay the suit amount under suit pronote. Ex.A1 is the suit pronote executed by the Defendant in favour of Plaintiff for Rs.74,000/-, dt.22.9.2015.

7) The document Ex.A1 discloses that the Defendant borrowed a sum of Rs.74,000/-, dt.22.9.2015 from the Plaintiff and executed Ex.A1 pronote in favour of the Plaintiff, agreeing to repay the same with interest at 24% per annum, later failed to repay the debt under Ex.A1. If the

Defendant did not borrow the amount under Ex.A1 then nothing prevented him to contest the suit denying the averments of plaint by filing written statement, but the Defendant remained exparte.

8) The evidence of PW1 coupled with documentary evidence discloses that the Defendant borrowed amount and executed Ex.A1 pronote in

OS No.776/2017 Page 3 of 3 PJCJ Court, Atp

favour of the Plaintiff and later failed to discharge the debt covered under

Ex.A1 pronote, hence the Plaintiff is entitled for the suit amount as prayed for. Accordingly, point No.1 is answered in favour of the Plaintiff.

Point No.2:-

9) In the result, the suit is decreed with costs for an amount of

Rs.1,10,096/- (Rupees one lakh ten thousand and ninety six only) with costs subsequent interest at the rate of 12 percent per annum from the date of the suit till the date of decree and thereafter at 6 percent per annum from the date of decree till the date of realization on principal amount of Rs.74,000/-.

Typed to my dictation by Stenographer, corrected and pronounced by me in open court, this the 27th day of February, 2018.

Prl. Junior Civil Judge, Anathapuramu. Appendix of Evidence Witnesses Examined

Plaintiff Defendant PW1 : C.Sree Ramulu None

Exhibits marked

Plaintiff Defendant: Nil.

Ex.A1: Original promissory note executed by the Defendant in favour of Plaintiff for Rs.74,000/-, dated 22.9.2015.

Prl. Junior Civil Judge, Anathapuramu.

In the Court of the Principal Junior Civil Judge,

Anantapuramu

Present: Smt. A. Geetha Vanee,

Prl. Junior Civil Judge, Anantapuramu.

Monday, the 26 th day of February, 2018

O.S.No.773/2017

Between:-

R.Ganga Devi, W/o S.Venkata Ramana, Hindu, aged 33 years, Ladies Tailor, residing at Door No.12-4- 513-1, Obula Deva Nagar, Anantapuramu …Plaintiff.

AND

B.Janardhan Reddy, S/o Adi Reddy, aged 30 years, Hindu, residing at Door No.1-122, Koti Reddy Palli village, Konda Gutta Palli post, Mudigubba Mandal, Ananthapuramu district …Defendant.

This suit coming on this day for final hearing before me in the presence of Sri. Siddavatham Mahaboob Basha, Advocate for the

Plaintiff and the Defendant has been called absent and remained

Exparte, upon hearing and having perused the material on record and this court delivered the following:-

: : J U D G E M E N T : :

1) The suit is filed U/O VII Rule 1 and 2 CPC on behalf of the Plaintiff by the counsel for Plaintiff against Defendant for recovery of amount basing on promissory note.

2) The averments of the plaint in brief are as follows:

That on 29.10.2014, the Defendant borrowed a sum of

Rs.20,000/- from the Plaintiff and executed the suit promissory note in favour of the Plaintiff, agreeing to repay the same with interest at the rate of 24% per annum on the same day. Thereafter, in spite of repeated demands, the Defendant failed to repay the suit amount.

Hence, the Plaintiff is constrained to file the suit against the Defendant

OS No.773/2017 Page 2 of 3 PJCJ Court, Atp

for recovery of suit amount.

3) The Defendant remained exparte.

4) The Plaintiff is examined as PW1 and got marked Ex.A1 on behalf of the Plaintiff.

5) Heard arguments of the counsel for the Plaintiff.

Now the pints that arise for determination are :

1) Whether the Plaintiff is entitled for the suit amount as prayed for ?

2) To what relief?

POINT No.1:-

6) PW1- R.Ganga Devi deposed that she filed her chief affidavit in lieu of her chief examination that the Defendant borrowed a sum of

Rs.20,000/- on 29.10.2014 from the Plaintiff, executed a promissory note in her favour, agreeing to repay the same with interest at the rate of 24% per annum. In spite of repeated demands, the Defendant failed to repay the suit amount under suit pronote. Ex.A1 is the suit pronote executed by the Defendant in favour of Plaintiff for Rs.20,000/-, dated 29.10.2014.

7) The document Ex.A1 discloses that the Defendant borrowed a sum of Rs.20,000/-, dt. 29.10.2014 from the Plaintiff and executed Ex.A1 pronote in favour of the Plaintiff, agreeing to repay the same with interest at 24% per annum, later failed to repay the debt under Ex.A1.

If the Defendant did not borrow the amount under Ex.A1 then nothing prevented him to contest the suit denying the averments of plaint by filing written statement, but the Defendant remained exparte.

8) The evidence of PW1 coupled with documentary evidence discloses

OS No.773/2017 Page 3 of 3 PJCJ Court, Atp

that the Defendant borrowed amount and executed Ex.A1 pronote in favour of the Plaintiff and later failed to discharge the debt covered under Ex.A1 pronote, hence the Plaintiff is entitled for the suit amount as prayed for. Accordingly, point No.1 is answered in favour of the

Plaintiff.

POINT No.2:-

9) In the result, the suit is decreed with costs for an amount of

Rs.34,200/- (Rupees thirty four thousand and two hundred only) with costs subsequent interest at the rate of 12 percent per annum from the date of the suit till the date of decree and thereafter at 6 percent per annum from the date of decree till the date of realization on principal amount of Rs.20,000/-.

Typed to my dictation by Stenographer, corrected and pronounced by me in open court, this the 26th day of February, 2018.

Prl. Junior Civil Judge, Anathapuramu. Appendix of Evidence Witnesses Examined

Plaintiff Defendant PW1 : R.Ganga Devi None

Exhibits marked

Plaintiff Defendant: Nil.

Ex.A1: Pronote dt. 29.10.2014 executed by the Defendant in favour of Plaintiff.

Prl. Junior Civil Judge, Anathapuramu.

In the Court of the Principal Junior Civil Judge,

Anantapuramu

Present: Smt. A. Geetha Vanee,

Prl. Junior Civil Judge, Anantapuramu.

Monday, the 26 th day of February, 2018

O.S.No.867/2017

Between:-

Bestha Rajeswari, W/o B.Sreenivasulu, Hindu, aged 51 years, Business, residing at Door No.28/2/188, Navodaya Colony, Ananthapuramu City and district …Plaintiff.

AND

Y.Anthony Reddy, S/o Y.Chinnapa Reddy, aged about 50 years, working as Mechanic in Chemical Engineering Department, JNTU College of Engineering, Ananthapuramu …Defendant.

This suit coming on this day for final hearing before me in the presence of Sri. B.A.Obula Raju, Advocate for the Plaintiff and the

Defendant has been called absent and remained Exparte, upon hearing and having perused the material on record and this court delivered the following:-

: : J U D G E M E N T : :

1) The suit is filed U/O VII Rule 1 and 2 CPC on behalf of the Plaintiff by the counsel for Plaintiff against Defendant for recovery of amount basing on promissory note.

2) The averments of the plaint in brief are as follows:

That on 28.7.2017, the Defendant borrowed a sum of

Rs.2,10,000/- from the Plaintiff and executed the suit promissory note in favour of the Plaintiff, agreeing to repay the same with interest at the rate of 24% per annum on the same day. Thereafter, in spite of repeated demands, the Defendant failed to repay the suit amount.

Hence, the Plaintiff is constrained to file the suit against the Defendant

OS No.867/2017 Page 2 of 3 PJCJ Court, Atp

for recovery of suit amount.

3) The Defendant remained exparte.

4) The Plaintiff is examined as PW1 and got marked Ex.A1 on behalf of the Plaintiff.

5) Heard arguments of the counsel for the Plaintiff.

Now the pints that arise for determination are :

1) Whether the Plaintiff is entitled for the suit amount as prayed for ?

2) To what relief?

POINT No.1:-

6) PW1- Bestha Rajeswari deposed that she filed her chief affidavit in lieu of her chief examination that the Defendant borrowed a sum of

Rs.2,10,000/- on 28.7.2017 from the Plaintiff, executed a promissory note in her favour, agreeing to repay the same with interest at the rate of 24% per annum. In spite of repeated demands, the Defendant failed to repay the suit amount under suit pronote. Ex.A1 is the suit pronote executed by the Defendant in favour of Plaintiff for Rs.2,10,000/-, dated 28.7.2017.

7) The document Ex.A1 discloses that the Defendant borrowed a sum of Rs.2,10,000/-, dt. 28.7.2017 from the Plaintiff and executed Ex.A1 pronote in favour of the Plaintiff, agreeing to repay the same with interest at 24% per annum, later failed to repay the debt under Ex.A1.

If the Defendant did not borrow the amount under Ex.A1 then nothing prevented him to contest the suit denying the averments of plaint by filing written statement, but the Defendant remained exparte.

8) The evidence of PW1 coupled with documentary evidence discloses

OS No.867/2017 Page 3 of 3 PJCJ Court, Atp

that the Defendant borrowed amount and executed Ex.A1 pronote in favour of the Plaintiff and later failed to discharge the debt covered under Ex.A1 pronote, hence the Plaintiff is entitled for the suit amount as prayed for. Accordingly, point No.1 is answered in favour of the

Plaintiff.

POINT No.2:-

9) In the result, the suit is decreed with costs for an amount of

Rs.2,26,100/- (Rupees two lakhs twenty six thousand and one hundred only) with costs subsequent interest at the rate of 12 percent per annum from the date of the suit till the date of decree and thereafter at 6 percent per annum from the date of decree till the date of realization on

principal amount of Rs.2,10,000/-.

Typed to my dictation by Stenographer, corrected and pronounced by me in open court, this the 26th day of February, 2018.

Prl. Junior Civil Judge, Anathapuramu. Appendix of Evidence Witnesses Examined

Plaintiff Defendant PW1 : Bestha Rajeswari None

Exhibits marked

Plaintiff Defendant: Nil.

Ex.A1: Pronote dt. 28.7.2017 executed by the Defendant in favour of Plaintiff.

Prl. Junior Civil Judge, Anathapuramu.

IN THE COURT OF THE PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE, ANANTAPURAMU.

Present:-Smt. A. Geetha Vanee,

Principal Junior Civil Judge, Anantapuramu.

Monday, 26 th day of February, 2018.

OS.No.31/17

Between:-

The State Bank of India , Narpala Branch, Represented by its branch manager. … plaintiff

And

1) A.Lakshminarayana.

2) V.Chinna Chenna Reddy ... Defendants.

Suit for passing a preliminary decree in favour of the plaintiff and against the D.1 and D2 for the suit amount of Rs.2,44,033/- due on a mortgage deed executed by the defendants in favour of the plaintiff bank for a sum of

Rs.1,00,000/- agreeing to repay the same with interest at 12.50% as per registered mortgage deed dt.3.4.2008 and direct the sale of the property mentioned in the plaint schedule to enable the plaintiff to realize the amount due and if the amount so realized is not sufficient to satisfy the decree debt a personal decree against the D.1 and D.2 for the amount due under the decree and for costs of the suit.

This case coming on this day for final disposal before me in the presence of Sri P.Venkatarami Reddy, Advocate for the plaintiff, the defendants having been called absent and set exparte, memo filed stating with the defendants paid total suit amount, this court delivered the following:-

:: J U D G M E N T :

IA. 175/18 Is allowed. The suit is advanced to this day. Memo filed stating

that the defendant had paid total suit amount and no due from bank and same is recorded. Hence the suit is dismissed without costs.

Pronounced by me in open Court, this the 26th day of February, 2018.

PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE

Anantapuramu. Appendix of Evidence: NIL

P.J.C.J

IN THE COURT OF THE PRINCIPAL JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE,

ANANTAPURAMU

Present: Smt. A. Geetha Vanee,

Prl. Junior Civil Judge, Anantapuramu.

Wednesday, the 28 th day of February, 2018

Original Suit No.720 of 2016

Between:-

Ekila Yerriswamy... Plaintiff

And

Dubba Chandrasekhar Reddy...Defendant

Suit for Permanent Injunction restraining the defendant, his men, agents, relatives and servants from interfering with the plaintiff‘s peaceful possession and enjoyment over the plaint schedule property and for costs of the suit.

This suit is coming on this day before me for final disposal in the presence of Sri M.Guruswamy, Advocate for the plaintiff and Sri L.K.Sudheendra Nath, Advocate for the defendant, plaintiff counsel filed memo not pressing the suit, this Court delivered the following:-

J U D G M E N T

IA.167/18 is allowed. The suit is advanced to this day from

18.4.18. Plaintiff counsel filed memo not pressing the suit and same is recorded. Hence the suit is dismissed as not pressed.

Pronounced by me in the open Court on this the 28th day of February,2018

Prl. Junior Civil Judge, Ananthapuramu

Appendix of Evidence:NIL

P.J.C.J.