Smt C. Pavani

Prl. Junior Civil Judge, Armoor

Armoor, SCJ Court Complex · Nizamabad · Telangana

Smt C. Pavani, Prl. Junior Civil Judge, Armoor, is posted at Armoor, SCJ Court Complex, Nizamabad, Telangana, India. 185 court orders on record since 2011. 5 judgments with full text available. Primarily handles CC, OS, MC cases.

185

Total Orders

Judgments

Orders/Month

Posting

Featured Judgments

OS/53/2012

Pallikonda Limbadri vs M.A.Khadeer

28 Mar 2014

IN THECOURT OF THE PRINCIPAL JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE, ARMOOR

Present:- Smt. C.Pavani Prl. Junior Civil Judge, Armoor

Dated this the 28th day of March, 2014

O.S.No.53 of 2012

Between:- Pallikonda Limbadri S/o: Gundaiah, Age: 55 years, Caste: Vysya, Occu: Business, R/o: Bheemgal village & Mandal, Nizamabad District ….Plaintiff // And //

M.A. Khadeer S/o: M.A. Majeed, Age: 40 years, Caste: Muslim, Occu: Business & owner of Tractor, R/o: Mendora village, Bheemgal Mandal, Nizamabad District …Defendant

This suit coming before me on this the 21st day of March, 2014 for hearing and disposal in the presence of Sri B. Jagadish, learned counsel for Plaintiff and Sri S. Jagan, learned counsel for Defendant and having stood over for consideration the Court delivers the following: - ::JUDGMENT::

1.This suit is filed seeking recovery of an amount of Rs.16,800/- from the defendant with interest and costs.

2.Brief averments of the plaint are as follows:-

The plaintiff and the defendant are well acquainted with each other.

Out of the said acquaintance the defendant approached the plaintiff and requested him to give a hand loan of Rs.10,000/- for his family necessities.

At the request of the defendant the plaintiff advanced an amount of

Rs.10,000/- to the defendant on 12-6-2009 and after receiving the said amount the defendant promissed to repay the loan amount with interest @ 24 % per annum on demand and executed a promissory note to that effect. It is averred that in spite of several requests the defendant failed to repay the said loan amount. As such on 22-3-2012 the plaintiff got issued a legal notice to 2OS NO.53/12 the defendant demanding him to repay the loan amount. The defendant received the legal notice, but he neither repaid the loan amount nor gave any reply. The defendant is liable to pay an amount of Rs.10,000/- towards

principal and an amount of Rs.6,800/- towards interest in total an amount of

Rs.16,800/-. As such the plaintiff filed the suit seeking recovery of money from the defendant.

3.The defendant filed his written statement contending that he never took any hand loan from the plaintiff and never executed any promissory note in his favour. It is averred that after receipt of the legal notice the defendant approached the plaitniff and asked him as to why he got issued a legal notice to him and the plaintiff replied that he got issued the legal notice to one Abdul Khadeer and the same was received by him and at his request the defendant returned the legal notice to him and the plaintiff assured that he would not file any case agaianst him. It is averred that the plaintiff created a false promissory note and only in order to extract money from him he filed the suit. Hence, the defendant prayed to dismiss the suit.

4.Basing on the above pleadings the following issues were framed.

1. Whether the promissory note dt.12-6-2009 is true valid and binding on the defendant?

2. Whether the plaintiff is entitled for recovery of money from the defendant. If so to what relief?

5.In support of his case the plaintiff got examined himself as Pw.1 and one K. Rajeshwar as Pw.2 and got marked Ex.A1 to A3. The defendant did not choose to lead either oral or documentary evidence.

6.Heard the learned counsel for the plaintiff and as the learned counsel for the defendant failed to advance his arguments inspite of granting sufficient opportunities his arguments were treated to be heard.

3OS NO.53/12

7. Issue No.1:-

The plaintiff as Pw.1 deposed that on 12-6-2009 at the request of the defendant he advanced an amount of Rs.10,000/- to the defendant towards hand loan and on the same day the defendant executed a promissory note in his favour agreeing to repay the loan amount with interest @ 24% per annum. He further deposed that in spite of several requests the defendant failed to repay the loan amount and as such he got issued a legal notice to the defendant on 22-3-2012 calling upon the defendant to repay the loan amount and the defendant received the said legal notice but he neither repaid the loan amount nor gave any reply to the said notice. He further deposed that the defendant is liable to pay an amount of Rs.10,000/- towards

principal and Rs.6,800/- towards interest in total an amount of Rs.16,800/-.

During cross examination he deposed that the defendant used to come to his shop as such he got acquaintance with him. He deposed that he does not know if one Abdul Khader resides at Mendora or not. He further deposed that at the time he gave the amount to the defendants at his shop only himself, the defendant and one Rajeshwar were present. He denied the suggestion that the signature appearing on Ex.A1 is not the signature of the defendant. He denied the suggestion that the defendant never took loan from him and never executed any promissory note.

8.Pw.2 is one K. Rajeshwar. He deposed that the defendant borrowed an amount of Rs.10,000/- from the plaintiff and executed a promissory note in his presence promising to repay the amount with interest @ 24% per annum on demand and inspite of several requests the defendant failed to repay the said amount. During cross examination he deposed that the defendant is a good friend of him and he came his house and informed him about the suit transaction. He further deposed that the loan amount was given in rupees hundred denomination.

4OS NO.53/12

9.The evidence of Pw.1 to the effect that on 12-6-2009 the defendant borrowed an amount of Rs.10,000/- from him and executed Ex.A1 promissory note promising to repay the loan amount with 2% interest per month and inspite of several requests when the defendant failed to repay the loan amount he got issued a legal notice to the defendant but the defendant neither repaid the loan amount nor gave any reply to his legal notice and fell due an amount of Rs.16,800/- is cogent and trustworthy. Nothing material was elicited from him during cross examination. The evidence of Pw.1 is supported by the evidence of Pw.2 who deposed that in his presence Pw.1 gave the money to the defendant.

10.Further Ex.A1 promissory note is the direct evidence of the suit transaction. The contention of the defendant is that Pw.1 informed him that he got the legal notice issued to one Abdul Khader and by mistake it was received by him and Pw.1 took back the legal notice and assured the defendant that he would not file any suit. The defendant failed to prove the said contention. Further the defendant in the written statement filed by him has put his signature as Abdul Khader. The evidence of Pw.1, Pw.2 and

Ex.A1 remained unrebutted. Further as per Sec 118 a presumption shall be made that the promissory note was drawn for consideration on the date mentioned therein and accepted for consideration. The defendant failed to rebutt the said presumption. The defendant contended that the signature appearing on Ex.A1 is not his signature and the same has been forged. But the defendant failed to prove the same. Further the plaintiff got issued a legal notice to the defendant demanding him to repay the loan amount as under

Ex.A2 and the same was received by the defendant as evident from Ex.A3 acknowledgment. But the defendant did not choose to give any reply to the same. As such it can be presumed that the defendant accepted the claim of the plaintiff as such he did not give any reply. Through his evidence 5OS NO.53/12 supported by the evidence of Pw.2 and Ex.A1 to A3 the plaintiff proved that

Ex.A1 promissory note is true, valid and binding on the defendant. Hence,

Issue No.1 is answered in favour of the plaintiff and against the defendant.

12.Issue No.2:-

In view of the finding on Issue No.1 the plaintiff is entitled for recovery of the suit amount as prayed for.

13.In the result, the suit is decreed without costs for an amount of

Rs.16,800/- in favour of the plaintiff and against the defendant with interest @ 12% per annum from the date of suit till the date of decree and future interest @ 6% per annum from the date of decree till the date of realization on the principal amount of Rs.10,000/-.

Typed to my dictation, corrected and pronounced by me in the open Court on this the 28th day of March, 2014.

Prl. Junior Civil Judge, Armoor

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

Witnesses examined on behalf of PlaintiffDefendants

Pw.1: Pallikonda Limbadri--Nil-- Pw.2: Kunta Rajeshwar Exhibits marked

Ex.A1: Promissory note--Nil-- dt.12-6-2009 Ex.A2: Office copy of legal notice dt.22-3-2012 Ex.A3: Postal acknowledgement dt.24-3-2012

Prl. Junior Civil Judge, Armoor

MC/23/2013

Pallikonda chinna Chinniah vs R1-Pallikonda.Srinivas

28 Mar 2014

IN THE COURT OF THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS AT

ARMOOR

Present:- Smt. C.Pavani

Judicial Magistrate of First class,

Armoor

Dated this the 28th day of MARCH,2014

M C No.23 of 2013

Between:-

1. Pallikonda Chinna Chinnaiah S/o: Chinnaiah, Age: 65 years, Occu: Nil, Brahmanpally village, Jakranpally Mandal, Dist. Nizamabad

2. Pallikonda Laxmi W/o: Chinna Chinnaiah, Age: 55 years, Occu: Nil, R/o: Brahmanpally village, Jakranpally Mandal, Dist. Nizamabad …Petitioners // And //

1. Pallikonda Srinivas S/o: Chinna Chinnaiah, Age: 29 yers, Occu: Private Job, R/o: Brahmanpally village, Jakranpally Mandal, Dist. Nizamabad

2. Pallikonda Suresh S/o: Chinna Chinnaiah, Age: 26 years, Occu: Business & Fisherman, Caste: Gundla, R/o: Brahmanpally village, Jakranpally Mandal …Respondents

This suit coming before me on this the 21st day of March, 2014 for hearing and disposal in the presence of Sri R. Suresh Kumar, Advocate for the Petitioners, and the Respondents having remained exparte, and having heard and stood over for consideration till this day the Court delivers the following: -

O R D E R

1.This petition is filed u/s 125 Cr.P.C. seeking maintenance from the respondents.

2.Brief averments of the petition are as follows:

The petitioners are the natural parents of the respondents. It is averred that the petitioners have two sons and a daughter. The petitioners have brought up their children, provided education to them and performed the marriages of their daughter and the elder son. It is averred that by borrowing an amount of Rs. 2,60,000/- the petitioners have sent their son to Gulf. The petitioners have constructed a house by raising a loan of Rs.

5,00,000/-. It is averred that after settling in their lives the respondents necked out the

MC No.23/13.....................................2…....................................................................................................

petitioners from their house and started neglecting them and are not providing any maintenance to them and left them homeless in the old age. It is averred that the respondents are residing in a rented house at Brahmanpally. It is averred that the petitioners being old aged are suffering with several ailments and are not in a position to maintain themselves and the respondents being their sons are not providing maintenance to them. It is averred that the respondents are doing business and getting monthly income of Rs. 20,000/- and they are also having houses worth Rs. 10,00,000/-. It is averred that the respondents require maintenance amount of Rs.6,000/- p.m each for their maintenance. The petitioners are seeking monthly maintenance of Rs.6,000/- each from the respondents.

3.Both the respondents remained exparte.

4.In support of their contentions the petitioners got examined the petitioner no.1 as

Pw.1.

5.Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and perused the record.

6.Now the points for determination are:

1.Whether the respondents having sufficient means neglected to provide maintenance to the petitioners who are unable to maintain themselves?

2.Whether the petitioners are entitled to seek maintenance from the respondents. If so to what relief?

7.Point no.1:-

The petitioner no.1 as Pw.1 deposed that they are having one daughter and two sons. She deposed that they brought up the respondents, provided education to them and performed the marriage of the respondent no.1. She further deposed that they have sent the respondent no.1 to Gulf by borrowing an amount of Rs. 1,50,000/-. She further deposed that they constructed a house by borrowing an amount of Rs. 5,00,000/- and

MC No.23/13.....................................3…....................................................................................................

that the respondents have necked them out of the house and are not providing any maintenance to them. She deposed that the respondents are fishermen and earning Rs.

20,000/-p.m each and are also having own houses. She deposed that herself and the respondent no.2 are not having any source of income to maintain themselves and that they are suffering from many old age ailments. She deposed that they require an amount of Rs.6,000/- p.m for their maintenance and medicines. The averments of the petitioners and the evidence of Pw.1 remained unchallenged as the respondents remained exparte.

Through the evidence of Pw.1 the petitioners proved their relationship with the respondents and the fact that the respondents having sufficient means failed to provide maintenance to them who are not able to maintain themselves. Hence point no.1 is answered in favour of the petitioners and against the respondents.

8.Point no.2:-

In view of the finding on point no.1 and in view of the fact that the respondents being the sons of the petitioners are liable to provide maintenance to the petitioners point no.2 is answered in favour of the petitioners and against the respondents. The evidence of Pw.1 is to the effect that the respondents are earning Rs.20,000/- p.m each and are also having own houses. Except the evidence of Pw.1 there is no cogent evidence to prove the avocation and the income of the respondents. However having regard to the fact the respondents are able bodied young persons and the petitioners are old aged persons suffering with many old age ailments this court is of the view that an amount of

Rs.2,000 p.m would be a reasonable amount for their maintenance and medical expenses.

MC No.23/13.....................................4…....................................................................................................

9.In the result, the petition is allowed partly granting monthly maintenance of Rs.

2,000/- p.m. for each petitioner and the respondent no.1 and 2 shall pay Rs.1,000/- each to each petitioner i.e Rs.2,000/- p.m in total to each petitioner from the date of petition.

Typed to my dictation, corrected and pronounced by me in the open Court on this the 28th day of March, 2014.

Judl. Magistrate of First Class,

Armoor

Appendix of Evidence Witnesses examined on behalf of Petitioner Respondent Pw.1: P. Laxmi --Nil--

Exhibits marked --Nil----Nil--

Judl. Magistrate of First Class, Armoor

EP/15/2013

Ms. Shriram City Union Finance Ltd., vs Haji

28 Mar 2014

IN THE COURT OF THE PRINCIPAL JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE,

AT ARMOOR:

PRESENT:- Smt C.Pavani, B.Com., LL.M., Prl Junior Civil Judge, Armoor

Dated this the 28th day of March, 2014

O.S. No.15 of 2013

Between:-

Bontha Chinna Sayanna S/o: Devanna, Age: 50 years, Occu: Agriculture, R/o: Issapally village, Armoor Mandal, Dist. Nizamabad ….Plaintiff // And //

Ummeda Subash @ Aloor Subash S/o: Gangaram, Age: 40 years, Occu: Seeds Business, R/o: Aloor village, Armoor Mandal, Dist. Nizamabad ….Defendant

This suit coming on this the 20th day of March, 2014 for hearing and disposal before me in the presence of Sri R. Suresh Kumar, learned counsel for the plaintiff and the defendant having remained exparte and having stood over for consideration, the Court delivers the following:-

-: JUDGMENT :-

1.This suit is filed seeking perpetual injunction against the defendant.

2.Brief averments of the plaint are as follows.

The plaintiff is the absolute owner and possessor of the agricultural land in sy.no.87/1__ to an extent of Ac.0-11 gts., and Sy.No.87/___to an extent of Ac.0-34 gts., situated at

Issapally village shivar of Issapally village of Armoor Mandal,

Dist. Nizamabad. It is averred that the said lands are

OS No.15/13..................................2…...........................................................

ancestral properties of the plaintiff acquired by him from his father and he is cultivating the same. It is avered that the defendant having no right or interest over the suit land is interfering with the possession of the plaintiff over the suit land. It is averred that on 5-2-2013 the defendant went to the suit land and tried to interfere with the possession of the plaintiff over the suit land and on resistance he went away from there threatening to dispossesses the plaintiff from the suit land. As such the plaintiff filed the suit seeking perpetual injunction against the defendant.

3.The defendant remained exparte.

4.In support of his claim the plaintiff got examined himself as Pw.1 and one K. Gangaram as Pw.2 and got marked Ex.A1 to A3.

5.Heard the learned counsel for the plaintiff and perused the record.

6.Now the points for determination are:

1.Whether the plaintiff was in possession of the suit schedule property as on the date of filing the suit?

2.Whether the plaintiff is entitled for perpetual injunction against the defendants. If so to what relief?

7.Point no.1:-

The contention and the evidence of the plaintiff is that he is the absolute owner and possessor of the land in ys.no.87/1___ to an extent of Ac.0-11 gts., and Sy.No.87/___

OS No.15/13..................................3…...........................................................

to an extent of Ac.0-34 gts., situated at Issapally village shivar of Armoor Mandal having acquired the same from his father and is cultivating the same. In order to prove his title and possession over the suit land the plaintiff relied upon

Ex.A1 to A3 and the evidence of Pw.2. Pw.2 K. Gangaram who is the neighbouring land owner categorically deposed about the ownership and possession of the plaintiff over the suit land and the interference caused by the defendant. Ex.A1 is the pattedar pass book and Ex.A2 is the title deed pass book which shows that the plaintiff is the pattedar of the suit land.

Ex.A3 is the CC of pahani for the year 2012-13 which shows that the plaintiff is in possession of the suit property as on the date of filing the suit. The evidence of Pw.1 supported by the evidence of Pw.2 and Ex.A1 and A2 remained unchallenged as the defendants remained exparte. Through his evidence supported by the evidence of Pw.2 and Ex.A1 and A2 the plaintiff succeeded in proving that he is the pattedar and possessor of the suit land and he is in possession of the suit land as on the date of filing the suit.

Hence, the point no.1 is answered in favour of the plaintiff and against the defendants.

8.Point No.2:-

The evidence of Pw.1 and Pw.2 is to the effect that without having any right or interest over the suit schedule property the defendant is interfering with the possession of

OS No.15/13..................................4…...........................................................

the plaintiff over the suit property and on 5-2-2013 the defendant went to the suit land and interfered with the possession of the plaintiff over the suit land. The evidence of

Pw.1 and Pw.2 in this regard remained unchallenged. In view of finding on issue no.1 and in view of the evidence of Pw.1 this point is answered in favour of the plaintiff and against the defendant and the plaintiff is entitled for perpetual injunction against the defendant.

9.In the result, the suit is decreed with costs restraining the defendant and his men from interfering with the possession and enjoyment of the plaintiff over the suit schedule property.

Typed to my dictation, corrected and pronounced by me in the open Court on this the 28th day of March, 2014.

Prl. Junior Civil Judge, Armoor

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

Witnesses examined on behalf of PlaintiffDefendants Pw.1: Bontha Chinna Sayanna --Nil-- Pw.2: Kanugutta Gangaram

Exhibits marked

Ex.A1: Pattedar pass book --Nil-- Ex.A2: Title deed Ex.A3:CC of pahani for the year 2012-13

Prl. Junior Civil Judge, Armoor

OS/10/2014

Telu Srinivas vs Telu Narsaiah

28 Mar 2014

IN THE COURT OF THE PRINCIPAL JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE,

AT ARMOOR:

PRESENT:- Smt C.Pavani, B.Com., LL.M., Prl Junior Civil Judge, Armoor

Dated this the 28th day of March, 2014

O.S. No.10 of 2014

Between:-

Telu Srinivas S/o: Late Narayana, Age: 40 years, Occu: Agriculture, R/o: Lakhora village, Vailpoor Mandal, Nizamabad District ….Plaintiff // And //

Telu Narsaiah S/o: Late Narsimulu, Age: 60 years, Occu: Agriculture, R/o: Lakhora village, Velpoor Mandal, Dist. Nizamabad ….Defendant

This suit coming on this the 21st day of March, 2014 for hearing and disposal before me in the presence of Sri L. Bhoopath Reddy, learned counsel for Plaintiff and the defendant having remained exparte and having stood over for consideration, the Court delivers the following:

:JUDGMENT:

1.This suit is filed seeking perpetual injunction against the defendant.

2.Brief averments of the plaint are as follows.

The father of the plalintiff was the absolute owner and possessor of the land in sy.no.220 to an extent of Ac.0-25 gts., situated at Lakkora village of Velpoor Mandal. It is averred that the father of the plaintff used to cultivate dry crops and he has also planted teak trees and mango trees in

OS No.10/14......................................2….......................................................

the said land. It is avered that after the death of the father of the plaintiff the suit land was tranferred in the name of the plaintiff and the plaintiff is in possession of the said land and cultlivating the same. It is averred that the defendant who is the cousin brother of the plaintiff who has his lands towards the eastern side of the suit land in the same survey number.

The defendant having no right or interest over the suit land is interfering with the possession of the plaintiff over the suit land. It is averred that on 16-1-2014 the defendant went to the suit land and tried to interere with the possession of the plaintiff over the suit land and on resistance he went away from there threatening to dispposses the plalintiff from the suit land. As such the plaintiff filed the suit seeking perpetual injunction against the defendants.

3.The defendants reamined exparte.

4.In support of his claim the plaintiff got examined himself as Pw.1 and got marked Ex.A1 and A2.

5.Heard the learned counsel for the plaintiff and perused the record.

6.Now the points for determiantion are:

1.Whether the plaintiff was in possession of the suit schedule property as on the date of filing the suit?

2.Whether the plaintiff is entitled for perpetual injunction against the defendants. If so to what relief?

OS No.10/14......................................3….......................................................

7.Point no.1:-

The contention and the evidnce of the plaintiff is that he is the absolute owner and possessor of the land in ys.no.220 to an extent of Ac.0-25 gts., situated at Lakkora village of

Velpoor Mandal having acquired the same from his father and is cultivating the same. In order to prove his title and possession over the suit land the plaintiff relied upon Ex.A1 and A2. Ex.A1 is the pattedar pass book which shows that the plaintiff is the pattedar of the suit land. Ex.A2 is the CC of pahani for the year 2013 which shows that the plaintiff is in possession of the suit property as on the date of filing the suit. The evidence of Pw.1 and Ex.A1 and A2 remained unchallenged as the defendants remaiend exparte. Through his evidence supported by Ex.A1 and A2 the plaintiff succeeded in proving that he is the pattedar and possessor of the suit land and he is in possession of the suit land as on the date of filing the suit. Hence, the point no.1 is answered in favour of the plaintiff and against the defendants.

8.Point No.2:-

The evidence of Pw.1 is to the effect that without having any right or interest over the suit schedule property the defendant is interfering with the possession of the plaintiff over the suit property and on 16-1-2014 the defendant went to the suit land and interfered with the possession of the

OS No.10/14......................................4….......................................................

plaintiff over the suit land. The evidence of Pw.1 in this regard remained unchallenged. In view of finding on issue no.1 and in view of the evidence of Pw.1 this point is answered in favour of the plaintiff and against the defendant and the plaintiff is entitled for perpetual injunction against the defendant.

9.In the result, the suit is decreed with costs restraining the defendant and his men from interfering with the possession and enjoyment of the plaintiff over the suit schedule property.

Typed to my dictation, corrected and pronounced by me in the open Court on this the 28th day of March, 2014.

Prl. Junior Civil Judge, Armoor

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

Witnesses examined on behalf of PlaintiffDefendants Pw.1: Telu Srinivas --Nil-- Exhibits marked Ex.A1: Pattedar pass book of --Nil-- plaintiff Ex.A2: CC of pahani for the year 2013

Prl. Junior Civil Judge, Armoor

OS/74/2013

akula gangadgar vs Vsallakona gangadhar

28 Mar 2014

IN THE COURT OF THE PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE, AT ARMOOR

PRESENT:- Smt C.Pavani, B.Com., LL.M., Prl Junior Civil Judge, Armoor.

Dated this the 28th day of MARCH, 2014

O.S No.74 of 2013

Between:- Akula Gangadhar S/o: Muthenna, Age: 42 years, Occu: RMP Doctor & Agriculture, R/o: Velmal village, Nandipet Mandal, Nizamabad District ….Plaintiff //And//

Allakonda Gangadhar S/o: Gangaram, Age: 38 years, Occu: Agriculture, R/o: Velmal village, Nandipet Mandal, Dist. Nizamabad

....Defendant

This suit coming on this the 21st day of March, 2013 for hearing and disposal before me in the presence of Sri M. Shankar, learned counsel for the Plaintiff, and Defendants having remained exparte and having stood over for consideration, the Court delivers the following:

:JUDGMENT:

1.This is a suit filed for recovery of an amount of Rs.73,230/- with interest and costs.

2.Brief averments of the plaint are as follows:

The plaintiff and the defendant are well acquainted with each other.

Out of the said acquaintance the defendant approached the plaintiff on 1-9- 2011 and requested him to arrange an amount of Rs.50,000/- as hand loan for his personal necessities. At the request of the defendant the plaintiff gave an amount of Rs.50,000/- to the defendant as a hand loan on 1-9-2009 and on the same day the defendant executed a promissory note agreeing to repay the loan amount with interest @ 2% per month. It is averred that in spite of

OS No.74/13...................................2….........................................................

several demands the defendant failed to repay the loan amount. The defendant is liable to pay an amount of Rs.50,000/- towards principal and

Rs.23,230/- towards interest in total Rs.73,230/-. As such the plaintiff filed the suit for recovery of the said amount from the defendant.

3.The defendant remained exparte.

4.In support of his case the plaintiff got examined himself as Pw.1 and one A. Ganesh as Pw.2 and got marked Ex.A1 to A4.

5.Heard the learned counsel for the plaintiff and perused the record.

6.Now the point for determination is:

Whether the plaintiff is entitled for recovery of the suit amount from the defendant. If so to what relief?

7.Point:-

The contention of the plaintiff is that he advanced an amount of

Rs.50,000/- to the defendant on 1-9-2011 and on the same day the defendant executed a promissory note agreeing to repay the loan amount with interest @ 2% per month on demand and inspite of several requests he failed to repay the loan amount. In order to prove his contention the plaintiff relied upon his evidence and the evidence of Pw.2 attestor of the promissory note and Ex.A1/promissory note. The plaintiff as Pw.1 categorically deposed about the suit transaction and execution of Ex.A1/promissory note. Pw.2 the attestor of the promissory note deposed that in his presence the defendant executed Ex.A1 promissory note promissing to repay the amount with interest @ 2% per month. The evidence of Pw.1 and Pw.2 remained unrebutted as the defendant remained exparte. Ex.A1/promissory note is the direct evidence of the suit transaction. Through his evidence supported by the evidence of Pw.2 and Ex.A1 the plaintiff proved the execution of

OS No.74/13...................................3….........................................................

Ex.A1/promissory note. Further as per Sec.118 Negotiable Instrument Act a presumption arises that the promissory note was made for consideration and it was made on the date mentioned on it and accepted. The defendant failed to rebut the presumption that arises under Sec.118 of the Negotiable

Instruments Act. Through his evidence supported by the evidence of Pw.2 and Ex.A1 the plaintiff proved that the defendant is liable to pay an amount of Rs.73,230/- to him. Hence, the point is answered in favour of the plaintiff and against the defendant.

8.In the result, the suit is decreed with costs in favour of the plaintiff and against the defendant for an amount of Rs.73,230/- with interest @ 12% p.a. from the date of suit till the date of decree and with future interest @ 6% p.a. from the date of decree till the date of realization on the principal amount of Rs.50,000/-.

Typed to my dictation, corrected and pronounced by me in the open Court on this the 28th day of March, 2014.

Prl. Junior Civil Judge, Armoor

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

Witnesses examined on behalf of Plaintiff Defendants PW1: Akula Gangadhar -Nil- PW2: A. Ganesh Exhibits marked

Ex.A1: Promissory Note dt.1-9-2011 -Nil- Ex.A2: Office copy of legal notice dt.6-2-2013 Ex.A3: Postal Receipt dt.6-2-2013 Ex.A4: Postal acknowledgment card

Prl. Junior Civil Judge, Armoor

Order Record 183 total

Case No.	Parties	Date	Type	Outcome
EP/15/2013	Ms. Shriram City Union Finance Ltd., vs Haji	28 Mar 2014	Order On Exgibit	—
OS/10/2014	Telu Srinivas vs Telu Narsaiah	28 Mar 2014	Order On Exgibit	—
OS/53/2012	Pallikonda Limbadri vs M.A.Khadeer	28 Mar 2014	Order On Exgibit	—
OS/74/2013	akula gangadgar vs Vsallakona gangadhar	28 Mar 2014	Order On Exgibit	—
MC/23/2013	Pallikonda chinna Chinniah vs R1-Pallikonda.Srinivas	28 Mar 2014	Order On Exgibit	—
CC/85/2012	PS Balkonda vs Thummal Muthyam Reddy	26 Mar 2014	Order On Exgibit	—
CC/452/2011	PS Armoor vs Matunga Gangadhar	26 Mar 2014	Order On Exgibit	—
CC/66/2011	P.S. Jakranpally vs Sama Ganga Reddy	25 Mar 2014	Order On Exgibit	—
CC/155/2011	PS Balkonda vs Karthala Swamy	25 Mar 2014	Order On Exgibit	—
CC/366/2012	PS Jakranpally vs Bhukya Shanker @ Unni	25 Mar 2014	Order On Exgibit	—
OS/11/2012	Pappula Anand vs Velpula Vadla Gangadher	21 Mar 2014	Order On Exgibit	—
OS/100/2012	The Manager,State Bank Of Hyderabad vs Chinnolla Ashok	21 Mar 2014	Order On Exgibit	—
OS/115/2013	P Susheela vs The District Collector Nizamabad	21 Mar 2014	Order On Exgibit	—
CC/498/2010	P.S. Armoor vs Beeja Boganna @ Karam Boganna	21 Mar 2014	Order On Exgibit	—
OS/14/2014	Dr Bashetti Shanker vs Mekala Sunitha	20 Mar 2014	Order On Exgibit	—
CC/58/2011	P.S. Armoor vs Suthela Dilip	18 Mar 2014	Order On Exgibit	—
CC/100/2011	P.S. Balkonda vs Rayaram Balaraju @ Balu	18 Mar 2014	Order On Exgibit	—
OS/103/2013	Syed Majid vs METHARI Naresh	14 Mar 2014	Order On Exgibit	—
CC/576/2005	P.S. Armoor vs Repanwad Shankar	14 Mar 2014	Order On Exgibit	—
CC/69/2014	PS Armoor vs Mohmed.Saheed	12 Mar 2014	Order On Exgibit	—
CC/316/2004	P.S. Armoor vs Thejavath Mothi Singh	12 Mar 2014	Order On Exgibit	—
CC/403/2012	P.S. Armoor vs Shaik Amjad @ Johny	11 Mar 2014	Order On Exgibit	—
CC/137/2014	PS Armoor vs A3-Pasthan.Peddulu	10 Mar 2014	Order On Exgibit	—
CC/103/2014	PS Nandipet vs Chendesi.Bhagyaraj	03 Mar 2014	Order On Exgibit	—
CC/80/2014	PS Armoor vs Yerra Golla.Raju	26 Feb 2014	Order On Exgibit	—
CC/68/2014	PS Armoor vs Shaik.kaleem	24 Feb 2014	Order On Exgibit	—
CC/99/2014	PS Armoor vs Magiri.SailuPapaiah	24 Feb 2014	Order On Exgibit	—
CC/95/2014	PS Nandipet vs Vsbaindla.Satyanarayana	21 Feb 2014	Order On Exgibit	—
OS/61/2010	Lingampally Maheshwaer vs Smt.Kunta Samyuktha Re	13 Feb 2014	Order On Exgibit	—
OS/95/2010	M.Vasanth Rao vs M.Jagadish Kumar	13 Feb 2014	Order On Exgibit	—
OS/101/2011	Baddam Raja Reddy vs K. Kummari Gangaram	13 Feb 2014	Order On Exgibit	—
CC/159/2012	P.S. Jakranpally vs Mothkuri Limbadri Goud	11 Feb 2014	Order On Exgibit	—
CC/23/2012	P.S. Nandipet vs Addhunoori Rajanna	10 Feb 2014	Order On Exgibit	—
CC/451/2011	P.S. Armoor vs Chathala Rajkumar	10 Feb 2014	Order On Exgibit	—
CC/204/2012	PS Balkonda vs Rajesh Sing	06 Feb 2014	Order On Exgibit	—
OS/48/2010	Gundla Aloor Laxmi vs Kalleda Sipai Ramulu	31 Jan 2014	Order On Exgibit	—
OS/48/2011	Dasari Surya Prakash Rao vs Gogeekar Prakash	31 Jan 2014	Order On Exgibit	—
CC/22/2012	P.S. Nandipet vs Kottur Narsaiah	31 Jan 2014	Order On Exgibit	—
CC/83/2012	PS Balkonda vs Habeeb Khan	31 Jan 2014	Order On Exgibit	—
CC/138/2010	PS Velpoor vs Royyala anil kumar	31 Jan 2014	Order On Exgibit	—
CC/154/2011	PS Jakranpally vs A-2 Yellolla Raju @ Rajashekar Goud	31 Jan 2014	Order On Exgibit	—
MC/12/2012	Asma Begum vs Shaik Mainuddin @ Mainu	31 Jan 2014	Order On Exgibit	—
OS/129/2011	S. Damodhar vs Mohd. Basheeruddin	30 Jan 2014	Order On Exgibit	—
CC/51/2012	PS Balkonda vs Bachan Singh Permar	30 Jan 2014	Order On Exgibit	—
CC/179/2012	P.S. Armoor vs Abdul Aleem	30 Jan 2014	Order On Exgibit	—
CC/187/2012	P.S. Armoor vs Udgiri Sayanna	30 Jan 2014	Order On Exgibit	—
CC/225/2012	Jakranpally PS vs Boidi Ashok	30 Jan 2014	Order On Exgibit	—
CC/243/2010	P.S. Armoor vs MD. Aleem	30 Jan 2014	Order On Exgibit	—
CC/342/2012	PS Nandipet vs Enagandula Savithri	30 Jan 2014	Order On Exgibit	—
CC/395/2012	P.S. Armoor vs Chinthagunti Malleshwar Rao	30 Jan 2014	Order On Exgibit	—
CC/445/2011	P.S. Nandipet vs Pusavarla Thirumalesh @ Manmala Thirumalesh	30 Jan 2014	Order On Exgibit	—
CC/246/2011	PS Balkonda vs Nalla Mohan	29 Jan 2014	Order On Exgibit	—
CC/370/2011	PS Balkonda vs Vemula Prahallad	29 Jan 2014	Order On Exgibit	—
OS/89/2009	Madaboi Narsaiah vs Kalleda Sipla Ramulu	28 Jan 2014	Order On Exgibit	—
CC/221/2013	PS Nandipet vs Pasula Mahipal	28 Jan 2014	Order On Exgibit	—
CC/240/2012	PS Armoor vs Gajam Raju	28 Jan 2014	Order On Exgibit	—
CC/417/2012	P.S. Nandipet vs Pasula Mahipal	28 Jan 2014	Order On Exgibit	—
CC/354/2011	PS Jakranpally vs Tejavatj Devidas	27 Jan 2014	Order On Exgibit	—
CC/363/2011	PS Armoor vs Vasam Rajender Kumar @ Ranjeeth	27 Jan 2014	Order On Exgibit	—
OS/84/2009	Smt.Komre raju vs Renjerla Gangaram	24 Jan 2014	Order On Exgibit	—
OS/85/2009	allakunta Laxmi vs Ranjerla Gangaram	24 Jan 2014	Order On Exgibit	—
OS/96/2013	Malavath gangu vs Baddam Rajanna	24 Jan 2014	Order On Exgibit	—
CC/617/2013	PS Armoor vs Shaik Anwar	24 Jan 2014	Order On Exgibit	—
OS/71/2010	Venkat Narayana Rao vs Madaro Sheri Ushanna	23 Jan 2014	Order On Exgibit	—
OS/128/2010	Mothe Chinna Reddy vs Mothe Buchanna	23 Jan 2014	Order On Exgibit	—
CC/148/2011	P.S. Armoor vs Syed Moiz	22 Jan 2014	Order On Exgibit	—
CC/527/2013	PS Armoor vs A1-Reddyveni.Laxmirajyam	22 Jan 2014	Order On Exgibit	—
CC/13/2011	PS Armoor vs Kotagiri Sridhar	21 Jan 2014	Order On Exgibit	—
CC/13/2012	P.S. Jakranpally vs Gaddam Padma Rao	21 Jan 2014	Order On Exgibit	—
EP/9/2010	Syed Fazalure Rahaman died perL.Rs Rahanabegum vs Gangubai	20 Jan 2014	Order On Exgibit	—
CC/230/2011	PS Jakranpally vs Markandeya.venkatesh	20 Jan 2014	Order On Exgibit	—
CC/288/2011	P.S. Armoor vs Sayyad Fazal	17 Jan 2014	Order On Exgibit	—
CC/537/2013	PS Balkonda vs A1-Mohd.Shafi	17 Jan 2014	Order On Exgibit	—
CC/541/2013	PS Balkonda vs A1-Mohd Shafi	17 Jan 2014	Order On Exgibit	—
CC/545/2013	PS Armoor vs Vsmohd shafi	17 Jan 2014	Order On Exgibit	—
CC/546/2013	PS Armoor vs A1-Mohd Shafi	17 Jan 2014	Order On Exgibit	—
CC/590/2013	PS Balkoda vs A1-Mohd.Shafi	17 Jan 2014	Order On Exgibit	—
CC/293/2011	PS Armoor vs A-2 malik Ashfaqhulla Khan	13 Jan 2014	Order On Exgibit	—
CC/310/2012	P.S. Armoor vs Bondla Mahesh	13 Jan 2014	Order On Exgibit	—
CC/262/2012	P.S. Armoor vs Kangula Sukuna	09 Jan 2014	Order On Exgibit	—
CC/270/2012	P.S. Jakranpally vs Gaddam Ramulu	09 Jan 2014	Order On Exgibit	—
CC/399/2011	PS Armoor vs Shaik Shoukht	09 Jan 2014	Order On Exgibit	—
CC/622/2013	PS Armoor vs Narra.Yellaiah	09 Jan 2014	Order On Exgibit	—
CC/630/2013	PS Armoor vs Shaik.shadhulla	09 Jan 2014	Order On Exgibit	—
MC/16/2012	P.Nadipi Gangu vs P.nadipi mallaiah	09 Jan 2014	Order On Exgibit	—
CC/585/2013	P.S. Armoor vs Chityala Raju	08 Jan 2014	Order On Exgibit	—
CC/586/2013	PS Armoor vs A1-Chityala.Raju	08 Jan 2014	Order On Exgibit	—
CC/137/2012	P.S. Balkonda vs Koppulwar Mahesh	07 Jan 2014	Order On Exgibit	—
CC/584/2013	PS Jakranpally vs Vsmailaram Rajender	07 Jan 2014	Order On Exgibit	—
CC/283/2013	PS Armoor vs A-3 pastham Peddulu	06 Jan 2014	Order On Exgibit	—
CC/437/2011	P.S. Jakranpally vs Lenkala Bhasker Reddy	06 Jan 2014	Order On Exgibit	—
OS/75/2010	P Linga goud vs Smt Sureddy Mallika	27 Dec 2013	Order On Exgibit	—
OS/114/2012	Chilkamukku Bhumaiah vs Katraji Srikanth	27 Dec 2013	Order On Exgibit	—
CC/68/2011	PS Balkonda vs Mittapally Ramakrishnna	27 Dec 2013	Order On Exgibit	—
CC/158/2011	P.S. Jakranpally vs Baindla Ramesh	27 Dec 2013	Order On Exgibit	—
CC/198/2012	P.S. Balkonda vs Dhandugula Karunakar	27 Dec 2013	Order On Exgibit	—
CC/267/2012	P.S. Armoor vs Allepu Mahesh	27 Dec 2013	Order On Exgibit	—
CC/375/2012	PS Balkonda vs Bodas Ramesh	27 Dec 2013	Order On Exgibit	—
CC/325/2011	PS Armoor vs Nepal Singh	26 Dec 2013	Order On Exgibit	—
CC/402/2011	P.S. Armoor vs Kandesh Madhu	26 Dec 2013	Order On Exgibit	—

Showing 100 of 183 orders — Log in to browse all pages.

Monthly Orders (Last 12 Months)

Mar 2014		24
Feb 2014		11
Jan 2014		56
Dec 2013		29
Nov 2013		30
Oct 2013		32
Sep 2013		3

Frequently Asked Questions

How many cases has Smt C. Pavani handled?

Smt C. Pavani has handled 185 court orders since 2011 at Armoor, SCJ Court Complex. The average disposal rate is 5 orders per month.

What types of cases does Smt C. Pavani hear?

Based on available records, Smt C. Pavani primarily handles Criminal matters (Criminal Cases) and Civil matters (Original Suits, Execution Petitions) at Armoor, SCJ Court Complex.

Where is Smt C. Pavani currently posted?

Smt C. Pavani is posted as Prl. Junior Civil Judge, Armoor at Armoor, SCJ Court Complex, Nizamabad, Telangana.

Are judgments by Smt C. Pavani available online?

Yes. 5 judgments by Smt C. Pavani are available on Legistro with full text, outcome, and sections cited.

How fast does Smt C. Pavani dispose cases?

Smt C. Pavani disposes approximately 5 cases per month, based on 185 orders handled over their tenure at Armoor, SCJ Court Complex.

Since when is Smt C. Pavani serving?

Smt C. Pavani has been serving at Armoor, SCJ Court Complex since 2011.

Case Types

CC 77%

OS 21%

MC 2%

EP 1%

Posting History

May 2011 — Apr 2014

Prl. Junior Civil Judge, Armoor · 185 orders

Other Judges at this Court

Smt. P. Sreedevi

Senior Civil Judge Armoor

383 orders

Smt. Nelli Sarala Rani

Prl. Junior Civil Judge, Armoor

303 orders

Ms. P. Bhavya Sree

Addl. Junior Civil Judge, Armoor

193 orders

← View all judges at Armoor, SCJ Court Complex