C.h.k.bhupathi

IN THE COURT OF THE PRL. DISTRICT JUDGE, KHAMMAM

Dated this, the 12th day of November, 2021

Present: Sri C.Hare Krishna Bhupathi, Prl. District Judge, Khammam.

I.P.No.18 of 2015

Between: Meleti Rajesh, s/o.late Mohan, age: 32 years, occ: Real Estate Business, presently Nil, R/o.H.No.5-30/1, Madhura Nagar colony, Road No.12, Gollagudem, Khammam Urban Mandal, Khammam District.

…….. Insolvency Petitioner.

And

1. Vankudoth Venkat, s/o.Ramaswamy, age: 32 years, R/o.H.No.5-7-103/1, Cheruvu Bazar, Khammam city and District.

2. Kondabolu Ram Mohan Rao, s/o.Gopal Rao, age: 66 years, R/o.H.No.6-1-16/314-1, Raghavaiah Nagar, Khammam City and District.

3. Bejawada Baby, w/o.Venkateswar Rao, age: 40 years, occ: house wife, R/o.Muppala village, Nandigama Mandal, Krishna District.

4. Chennamolu Koteswar Rao, s/o.name not known, aged about 38 years, R/o.Marusumalli village, Mailavaram Mandal, Krishna District.

5. Kokkireni Biksham, s/o.Chandraiah, age: 32 years, occ: Agrl., R/o.near Govt., Primary School, Kusumanchi village and Mandal, Khammam District.

6. Kondabolu Sridhar, s/o.Rammohan Rao, aged about 36 years, occ: Business, r/o.H.No.6-1-16/314-1, Raghavaiah Nagar, Khammam City and District.

7. Nelluri Sridhar, s/o.Rangaiah, age: 35 years, occ: Business, R/o.Kusumanchi village and Mandal,Khammam District.

2 IP No.18 of 2015 dt.12-11-2021

8. Gudey Pushpa Latha, w/o.Veerabhadram, age: 44 years, occ: House hold, R/o.H.No.4-2-416, Sri Nagar Colony, Line-1, Rotarynagar, Khammam City and District.

9. Shaik Nagul Meera, s/o.Saidulu, age: 45 years, occ: Business, R/o.H.No.5-5-256/4, Mustafa Nagar, Khammam City and District.

10. Barana Babu, s/o.name not known, age: 45 years, occ: Business, R/o.H.No.2-231/23G, Sri Nagar colony, Road no.9, Rotarynagar, Khammam city and District.

11. K.Chandra Sekhar, s/o.Sivaiah, age: 38 years, occ: Business, R/o.Chava Nageswar Rao, s/o.Satyanarayana, age: Major, occ: Agrl., R/o.H.No.1-6-136, Jubleepura, Khammam City and District.

12. Vemula Suresh, s/o.Krishnaiah, age: 32 years, occ: Business, R/o.Back side of Current office, Khanapuram and Khammam Urban Mandal, Khammam District.

13. Pasupuleti Laxmaiah, s/o.Peraiah, aged about 46 years, occ: Business, R/o.H.No.1-99, Nayudupeta locality, Khammam Rural Mandal, Khammam District.

14. Ramisetti Nageswar Rao, s/o.name not known, age: Major, R/o.H.No.6-1-426, VDO colony, Khammam city and District.

....Respondents.

This petition coming before me on 9-11-2021 for hearing in the presence of Sri Y.Ravi Kumar, Advocate for the Insolvency petitioner and Sri M.Nageswar Rao, Advocate for the respondent no.1 and respondents 2 to 14 remained exparte; upon perusing the record; and on hearing; and the matter having stood over for consideration, this Court delivered the following:

O R D E R

1.This is an Insolvency petition filed under Sections 7 and 10 r/w sec.13 of the Provincial Insolvency Act, 1920 3 IP No.18 of 2015 dt.12-11-2021 (in short, ‘the Insolvency Act’) by the petitioner, to declare him as an insolvent in respect of the debts of the respondents shown in ‘A’ schedule annexed to the petition.

2.The case of the petitioner as stated in the petition is briefly stated, as follows:

The petitioner was doing real estate business in and around Khammam and during that time, he used to borrow the amounts from several creditors on exorbitant interest varying from Rs.4/- to Rs.10/- per hundred per month and the respondents, who are the creditors and whose debts payable by the petitioner are given in detail in ‘A’ schedule annexed to the petition, obtained promissory notes and cheques from the petitioner and some of them obtained blank promissory note and blank cheques. Those blank cheques were out of the cheque book Sl.nos.290401 to 290415 possessed by the petitioner in relation to his account with the

State Bank of India, Rotarynagar Branch, Khammam.

The petitioner could do his real estate business till 2014 and from that year onwards he was unable to do the business due to some fluctuations in the business 4 IP No.18 of 2015 dt.12-11-2021 sector and as a consequence, the petitioner felt hard to discharge the debts due to the respondents. The respondents could not understand the financial difficulties of the petitioner and some of them threatened the petitioner with dire consequences.

They used to abuse the petitioner in filthy language and some of them took away the documents from the petitioner. The petitioner was man-handled by some of the respondents. The petitioner does not own any properties except the wearing apparel shown in ‘B’ schedule annexed to the petitioner which is worth

Rs.550/- only. The debts payable to the respondents are to a tune of Rs.19,20,000/- as described in ‘A’ schedule . The petitioner has no capacity to discharge the debts. Under these circumstances, the petitioner is forced to file this petition, praying the court to declare and adjudge him as an insolvent in respect of the debts payable to the respondents as shown in ‘A’ schedule.

3.On the registration of this petition, notices were issued to all the respondents and a general notice by way of publication in ‘Eanadu’ Telugu daily was also ordered.

5 IP No.18 of 2015 dt.12-11-2021

4.The first respondent filed a counter thereby opposing the petition, whereas the respondents 2 to 14 remained exparte. The contentions raised by the first respondent in the counter are briefly stated as follows:-

This respondent denied the case of the petitioner and submitted that the petitioner is concealing the true fact of having movable and immovable properties, and that he fraudulently kept those properties on the names of his relatives and friends. The contention of this respondent is that the petitioner is successfully running his business and, in fact, he also acquired huge amounts and immovable properties. This respondent pleaded that the petitioner is not entitled to seek an adjudication that he is an insolvent and such a relief sought for by the petitioner is motivated with malafides to cause loss to this respondent and the same is ill-conceived. With these main contentions, this respondent prayed the court to dismiss the petition with costs.

5.During the course of enquiry, the petitioner examined himself as PW.1 and no document is marked 6 IP No.18 of 2015 dt.12-11-2021 on the side of the petitioner. No evidence is adduced by the first respondent.

6.After the completion of the enquiry and on hearing the arguments of both sides, the petition is coming for the passing of the orders.

7.Now, the point for consideration is whether the petitioner is entitled to be declared and adjudged as an insolvent in respect of the debts of the respondents shown in ‘A’ schedule annexed to the petition as prayed for by the petitioner ?

POINT:-

8.PW.1 deposed in his evidence that he does not own any movable or immovable properties except the wearing apparel to a cost of Rs.550/- as shown in ‘B’ schedule annexed to the petition and that he has no means or financial capacity to discharge the debts of the respondents to a tune of Rs.19,20,000/- shown in ‘A’ schedule annexed to the petition. The petitioner further submitted that previously he was doing real estate business and during that time, he was borrowing the amounts at exorbitant interest rates and the creditors obtained promissory notes and some of them 7 IP No.18 of 2015 dt.12-11-2021 obtained blank promissory note and blank cheques from him. The petitioner further submitted that he sustained loss in the business and at present he is unable to pay and discharge any single debt payable to any one of the respondents.

9.In the cross-examination done to PW.1 by the learned counsel for the first respondent, it was suggested to PW.1 that he had got financial capacity to discharge the debts and that he filed the present petition with a malafide intention and that none of the respondents obtained blank promissory notes and blank cheques from him. PW.1 maintained that he is an insolvent with no financial capacity to discharge the debts. Except giving suggestions to PW.1, by way of cross-examination, the first respondent has not chosen to enter into the witness box to give evidence on oath and did not place any Iota of evidence to substantiate the contention of the first respondent that PW.1 has got movable and immovable properties and he kept those properties on the names of his relatives and friends in order to screen the same from the knowledge of the creditors. In the absence of any such evidence place by the first respondent, the mere 8 IP No.18 of 2015 dt.12-11-2021 suggestions given to PW.1 by the first respondent cannot be given any weight.

10.In the absence of contra evidence placed against the evidence of PW.1 and on account of the failure of the first respondent to place any piece of paper to show that PW.1 has got any movable or immovable properties, there is nothing on record to disbelieve or discredit or discard the testimony of PW.1 on any valid ground. Therefore, PW.1 is entitled to be declared as an insolvent in respect of the debts of the respondents shown in ‘A’ schedule annexed to the petition.

11.In the result, the petition is allowed without costs thereby adjudging the petitioner as an insolvent u/sec.27(1) of the Provincial Insolvency Act, 1920. The petitioner shall apply for an order of discharge u/sec.41 of the said Act within six months from the date of this order. This order of adjudication shall come into force from the date of the presentation of the petition. All the properties, if any, acquired by or devolved on the petitioner after the date of this order of adjudication 9 IP No.18 of 2015 dt.12-11-2021 and before his discharge u/sec.41 of the said Act shall forthwith vest in the Official Receiver, Khammam.

Dictated to Stenographer, transcribed by him, corrected

and pronounced by me in the open Court on this, the 12th day of November, 2021.

PRL.DISTRICT JUDGE,

KHAMMAM.

Appendix of Evidence

Witnesses Examined

For Petitioner:

PW.1 : M.Rajesh.

For Respondents: - none -

Exhibits marked

For Petitioner: - nil -

For Respondents: - nil -

PRL. DISTRICT JUDGE,

KHAMMAM.