Sri B. Kirankumar

1

IN THE COURT OF JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE, NARASANNAPETA.

Present: Sri. B. Kirankumar Junior Civil Judge, Pathapatnam (FAC) Junior Civil Judge, Narasannapeta.

Friday, this the 7th day of July, 2017

File No.:O.S.No 14/2017

Instituted on:10-4-2017

Parties:Thangudu Krishnarao son of late Rajulu, Hindu, aged 35 years, business, r/o. D.No.15- 24, Thammayyapeta veedhi, Narasannapeta town, post and mandal, Srikakulam District. … Plaintiff

vs.

Simma Asirinaidu son of late Jaggappanna, Hindu, aged 60 years, Velama, cultivation, r/o. No door number, Desavanipeeta, Narasannapeta town, post and mandal, Srikakulam District. … Defendant

Date of hearing:07-7-2017

Delivered on:07-7-2017

Counter for plaintiff:Sri C.Narasimhamurty, Sri J.Kameswararao, Sri Y.Narasingarao

Counsel for defendant:None (set exparte)

This suit coming on this day before me for final hearing in the presence of Sri C.Narasimhamurty, Sri J.Kameswararao, Sri Y.Narasingarao Advocates for the plaintiff and the defendant not filed written statement, set exparte on 2-6-2017 and having stood over for consideration till this day, this Court delivers the following :

J U D G M E N T

1. This suit is filed by the plaintiff against the defendant for grant of a decree for recovery of Rs. 1,67,040/- with future interest at the rate of 18% p.a. and by awarding costs of the suit and consequential reliefs.

2. The brief averments of the plaint filed by the plaintiff are that: The defendant borrowed an amount of Rs.1,20,000/- on 31-1-2015 from him and 2 executed promissory note agreeing to repay the same with interest at the rate of Rs.18% per annum at Narasannapeta. In spite of several demands made by the plaintiff, the defendant did not paid. Hence the suit.

3. After receipt of summons, the defendant called absent and not filed written statement set-exparte on 2-6-2017.

4. To prove the case of the plaintiff, the plaintiff himself examined as

P.W.1 by filing his affidavit in lieu of chief examination. Ex.A.1 to A3 are marked on behalf of the plaintiff. Ex.A.1 is the suit promissory note for an amount of Rs.1,20,000/- dated 31-1-2015, Ex.A2 is the office copy of legal notice dt.23-2-2017. Ex.A3 is reply notice dt. 4-3-2017.

5. Heard the counsel for the plaintiff.

6. Now the point for determination is:

Whether the plaintiff is entitled to recover the suit amount from

the defendant ?

7. The plaintiff filed the suit stating that the defendant borrowed an amount of Rs.1,20,000/- on 31-1-2015 and executed promissory note under

Ex.A1. After that, repeated requests and demands made by the plaintiff, the defendant did not paid any amount to him.

8. The suit based on Ex.A.1 i.e., promissory note dated 31-1-2015 is maintainable.

9. On perusal of the evidence of PW.1 coupled with Ex.A1 the suit claim is proved. The evidence of PW.1 is remained unchallenged. Under the above circumstances, this court comes to a conclusion that the plaintiff is entitled to recover the debt due on the promissory note.

10. In view of the foregoing discussion, it is held that the plaintiff has discharged initial burden and proved the execution of Ex.A1 by the defendant 3 in respect of passing of consideration as per Ex.A1 suit pro-note. Therefore, the presumption under sec.118 Negotiable Instruments Act operates in favour of the plaintiff and the same is unrebutted by the defendant. Hence, the plaintiff is entitled to recover the suit amount with costs and future interest from the defendant. Accordingly, point is answered in favour of the plaintiff and against the defendant.

RESULT: -

10. In the result, the suit is decreed with costs granting a decree for recovery of Rs.1,67,040 /- with interest at the rate of 12% p.a., from the date of the suit to till the date of decree and future interest at the rate of 6% p.a. on the principal amount i.e., Rs.1,20,000/- till the date of realization from the defendant.

Directly typed to my dictation, corrected and pronounced by me in the open court, this the 7th day of July, 2017.

JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE,

NARASANNAPETA.

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

WITNESSES EXAMINED

For Plaintiff : For Defendant:

P.W.1 : Tangudu Krishnarao None

DOCUMENTS MARKED

For Plaintiff:-

Ex.A.1 is the suit promissory note for an amount of Rs.1,20,000/-

dated 31-1-2015

Ex.A2 is the office copy of legal notice dt.23-2-2017. Ex.A3 is reply notice dt. 4-3-2017.

For Defendant:- Nil.

JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE,

NARASANNAPETA.

IN THE COURT OF THE JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE, NARASANNAPETA

Present: Sri B. Kirankumar

Junior Civil Judge, Pathapatnam (FAC) Narasannapeta

Friday, this the 14 th day of July, 2017

E.P. 14/2016 in OS. 01/2013

Between: Padala Bulli Bhamireddy, s/o. Late Satyanarayanareddy, Hindu, aged 53 years, Business, r/o. Visakha A colony, H.No.123/13/1, Srikakulam town and District.

… D.Hr/ plaintiff And: Itraju Manmadharao s/o. Raju, Hindu, aged about 48, cultivation, r/o. Desavanipeta street, H.No.13-1/3, Narasannapeta town and mandal, Srikakulam District.

... J.Dr/ Defendant

This petition coming on this day for final hearing before me in the presence of Sri R.Krishnannaidu, Advocate for the D.Hr/ plaintiff and of Sri R.Kondalarao, Advocate for the J.Dr/defendant and having stood over for consideration, this court delivers the following:

J U D G M E N T

This petition filed by the D.Hr/ plaintiff against the J.Dr/defendant to issue show notice u/O-21, R-37 of CPC to J.Dr and if fails to pay the EP amount issue arrest warrant to J.Dr U/O-21, Rule-38 CPC and sec.55 CPC and send him to civil prison and recovery the EP amount of Rs.93,700-00 together with subsequent interest and costs.

The counsel for the D.Hr/petitioner reported that he is not pressed the EP as full amount secured and endorsed on petition and recorded. In the result, the E.P. is dismissed as not pressed.

Pronounced by me in open court on this the 14 th day of July, 2017.

Junior Civil Judge, Narasannapeta.

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

WITNESSES EXAMINED

FOR D.Hr/PLAINTIFF: FOR J.Dr/DEFENDANT: No witnesses were examined and no documents marked

Junior Civil Judge, Narasannapeta.

both parties are present before LA and filed joint memo with terms of compromise and the accused paid total cheque amount of Rs.2,02,000 to the complainant and the same was received by him and settled the matter amicably. accordingly the accused is acquitted for the offence u/sec. 138 and 142 of NI Act. accordingly award is passed and unmarked and non valuable case property if any shall be destroyed forthwith.