Smt G.V.L.Saraswathi

IN THE COURT OF THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS::DARSI

Present:-Smt. G.V.L.Saraswathi,

Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Darsi

Thursday, this the Twenty Third (23rd ) day of November, 2023

CALENDAR CASE NO. 608 of 2023

Between:

The Sub Inspector of Police, Donakonda P.S.… Complainant

AND

Erella Venkata Swamy, S/o. Balaiah, 35 years, Kamma by caste, R/o. Peddapadu village and mandal, Srikakulam District, Native of Rudrasamudram village in Donakonda mandal. … Accused

The case is coming on before me for final hearing on 23.11.2023 in the presence of Assistant Public Prosecutor for the complainant and of P. Manoharamma, learned counsel for Accused and upon perusing the material on record, and having stood over for consideration till this day, the Court delivered the following __

JUDGMENT

1.The State represented by the Sub-Inspector of Police, Donakonda Police Station filed a charge sheet against accused, alleging that he committed the offence punishable under Section 386 of IPC .

2.The brief averments of the prosecution case is that Lw-1 is the de-facto complainant, LW-2 is the wife of LW-1, Lw's 3 to 5 are the independent circumstantial witnesses, Lw-6 and 7 are the scene observation and arrest mediators, Lw-8 is the investigation officer respectively.

Lw-1 is resident of Rayavaran village of Markapuram mandal, he is living by driving an auto. Lw-1 has Bajaj company Auto bearing Number: AP 39 X 9827. Every day Lw-1 drove his auto from his village to Markapuram for service, but on 23.07.2023 at about 13.00 hours in the afternoon, while Lw-1 was getting drove his auto at his village, at that time the accused came to Lw-1 and offered him 100/- rupees and asked him to take him to Markapuram in his auto, to which Lw-1 agreed. Then Lw-1 picked the accused up in his auto and left fro Ravavaram village and went to the court center in

Markapuram, where the accused asked Lw-1 to take him from there to Mallampeta village and he will give fum 500/- rupees, Lw-1 agreed and picked the accused up in his auto and left from Markapuram village, while going to Mallampeta village, the road is about 2 KM far away to Mallampeta village, the accused has informed that he has to urinate, Lw-1 stopped the auto, at that time the place was deserted. Then they urinated and came to the auto, meanwhile the accused came to Lw-1 with a stick and threatened

Lw-1 to give him the money and phone, otherwise he will beat him here. At that time, as the whole road they were going was desolation, Lw-1 was afraid that person would do something to him. So Lw-1 gave 600/- rupees money and a small keypad cell phone of

I- tell company. The accused threatened Lw-1 to give his auto key, due to fear Lw-1 gave his auto key. The Lw-1 drove his auto and left from there. As Lw.1 was already ill,

Lw-I reached Markapuram with the help of passers-by. Lw-1 told the same to his relatives what had happened there. As he was ill, Lw-1 could not come to the police station. Lw-1 searching for his auto in the surrounding villages and in Markapuram, but it was nowhere to be found. Hence Lw-1 came to PS and gave a report for necessary action

3.Basing on the report of LW-1, L-8 registered a case in Cr.No 78/2023 Is 386 IPC of Donakonda PS on 29.07.2023 at 20.00 hours and investigated into. During the course of investigation LW-8 have examined Lw's 1 to 5 witness and recorded their detailed statements in case dairy Part-II U/s 161 (3) Cr PC, Lw-8 also inspected the scene of offence in the presence of Lw's 6 and 7, prepared scene observation report duly attested by Lw's 6 and 7 and also prepared rough sketch of the scene of offence.

Basing on the evidence of the examined witness Lw's 1 to 5 the prima facie of case has been made out against the accused U/s 386 IPC. While the investigation is in progress on credible information L.W.8 caught the accused and enquired them in the presence of mediators. The accused confessed their guilt in the presence of mediators. To this effect a mediatornama was made in the presence of mediators and duly attested by the mediators. He also seized auto bearing Number: AP 39 X 9827 from the accused in the presence of mediators. Then he confirmed him accused in this case and arrested 16.30 hours on 07.09.2023 after explaining their grounds of arrest and served notice U/s 50, 51 Cr.PC. I have informed him his right to move on bail.

4. After completion of Investigation, L.W.8 field charge sheet against the accused for the offence punishable under sec. 386 of I,.P.C.

5.The case was taken on file u/Sec. 304 (A), 337 of I.P.C. and Sec. 3 r/w. 181 and 196 of M.V. Act.

6. Accused present copies supplied U/s. 207 Cr.P.C.

7. Examined under Sections 386 of IPC read over and explained to the accused in Telugu, U/s 239 of Cr.P.C and the accused did not plead guilty, he claimed for trial.

8.The prosecution listed 06 witnesses, but examined PWs.1 to 4. LW1/K. Srinivasa

Rao is examined as PW1, LW. 6 / I. Pitchi Reddy is examined as PW. 2, L.W. 7/ T.

Harinarayana is examined as PW3, L.W.8/ M. Saidu babu is examined as PW4 and got marked Exs. P1 to P5 and M.O.1 i.e., Ex. P.1 is the report, Ex. P.2 is the confession and seizure mediator nama dt. 07.09.2023, Ex. P.3 is the scene observation report, Ex.

P.4 is the F.I.R in Cr. No. 78/2023, Ex. P. 5 is the rough sketch of the scene of offence and M.O.1 is the Bajaj Compact Auto Bearing No. AP 39 X 9827.

9.The prosecution has given up the evidence of L.Ws. 2 to 5.

10.After closure of prosecution evidence accused was examined U/s 313 Cr.P.C explaining the incriminating material appearing against them, for which they denied.

Accused neither chosen to examine any defense witnesses and nor documents marked on their behalf.

11. The point for determination is: –

Whether prosecution has brought home the guilt of Accused for the

offence under Section 386 of IPC beyond all reasonable doubt?”

12.After going through the contents of both parties coupled with the evidence and documents, this Court for the better appreciation of the case, it is not necessary to reproduce the entire oral or documentary evidence and it will discuss as and when require to the extent required.

P O I N T :

13. To prove the case of the prosecution examined the defacto complainant examined as PW1, he deposed on 23.07.2023 the A1 boarded in his auto at Markapur

Railway Station at Court Center of Markapur, after reaching the place, he requested to go to Mallampeta, on the way of Mallampeta before 2.00 p.m., the accused asked to stop auto to attend natural call, on the request of accused, the P.W.1 stopped the auto while so, the accused attacked against P.W.1 with stick and beat him on his face, resulting he fallen down. The accused forcibly took away cell phone of P.W.1, and cash of Rs. 600/- from his pocket and flood away along with auto of P.W.1. On the assistance of by-passers, he reached to Markapur, from there to his home. On 29.07.2023 on the advise of his family members, he lodged a complainant under Ex.

P.11 report. Later, he get returned his auto, by filing miscellaneous petition through court. P.W.1 identified the accused, who was present in the court hall.

14.The prosecution also examined the mediators of the seizure mahazar and confessional report of accused as P.Ws.2 and 3, They deposed on 07.09.2023, the police of Donakonda requested him to act as a mediator and he accepted the same, he himself along with L.W.7 went to Donakonda – Rudravaram road, at about 3.00 p.m., the accused was coming in an auto bearing No. AP. 39 X 9827, on seeing them, the accused tried to flee away, then, they stopped and asked about this identical particulars, the accused revealed and confessed his name and about the offence of extortion of the auto, cell phone and cash of Rs. 500/- from P.W.1 at the out skirts of Mallavarampeta village. The police recorded his confessional statement under Ex.P.2 and seized the auto i.e., M.O.1. The P.Ws. 2 and 3 signed in Ex.P. 2 report along with L.W.7. The

P.W.3 further deposed on 30.07.2023 on the request of constable of Donakonda, he went to the police station, from there along with S.I. and staff reached to the mud road, leading to Ananthavaram village fields of Mallampeta – Markapur road. The police informed the offence was happened in that place, he observed the same, the police got prepared scene observation report under Ex. P.3.

15.The P.W. 2 was cross examined by the defense counsel about the time reached to the police station as well as to the scene of offence. The P.W.2 deposed in his chief examination at 3.00 p.m., they reached to the scene of offence, where as in his cross examination, he reached the police station at 3.00 p.m., how could possible the same person at two places on the same time. There is no argument on the side of the prosecution by clarifying the possibility of the presence of P.W.2 in two different places on the same time and on the same day.

16.The counsel for the accused cross examined the P.Ws. 2 and 3 about summons served upon them by the police officials, he act as a mediators, as well as the permission obtained by them from M.R.O., Donakonda to act as a mediators. The P.Ws.

2 and 3 deposed, no summons served upon them, and no written permission had taken by them, but they obtained oral permission. There is no hard and fast rule, the service of summons to the mediators, while they are participating along with police. Mere, non serving the summons to the mediators is not at all a fatal to the prosecution. If, the prosecution able to uplift their case with the cogent evidence beyond all reasonable doubt.

17.The prosecution also examined the investigation officer as P.W.4, who registered the case for the report submitted by P.W.1, as in Cr. No. 78/2023 under sec. 386 of

I.P.C under Ex. P.4 F.I.R, then he examined the P.W.1 and recorded his statement. On 30.07.2023 he visited the scene of offence located at Ananthavaram village fields, there he prepared Ex. P. 5 rough sketch, from there he went to Rayavaram village of

Markapurmandal, there he secured L.Ws. 2 to 5, examined them and recorded their statements. Then he returned to police station. On 07.09.2023 he arrested the accused and send him to judicial custody through court and recovered the property of

M.O.1 to court, then after completion of investigation, he filed the charge sheet. He further deposed, he did not conduct identification period of accused by P.W.1.

18.Even though, the prosecution examined the P.Ws 2 and 3, who deposed their presence, while seized the property and recording the confessional statement of the accused, as well as scene observation report under Ex. P.2 and P.3, along with S.I. of

Donakonda, who is P.W.4 here in. Surprisingly, the investigation officer i.e., P.W.4 did not stated any thing about securing P.Ws. 2 and 3 as well as seizure and confessional statement of Ex. P.2, like wise, got prepared observation report under Ex. P.3. The non deposing of the P.W. 4, about the presence of P.Ws. 2 and 2, at the time of Ex. P.2 and

P.3, which goes to shown, the P.W.4 given a clear way of acquittal to the accused.

Unless, the P.W. 4 deposed, the securing the P.Ws. 2 and 3 in their presence, he seized

M.O.1 and recorded the confessional statement of the accused, as well as got prepared scene observation report under Ex.P.2 and P.3, how could this court safely concluded the prosecution able to up lift the case beyond all reasonable doubt against the accused.

19. On perusal of P.W. 4 chief examination, he admitted that he did not conduct test

Identification Parade of the accused, which is most important evidence, for the grave offence of under sec. 386 of I.P.C., the identification of the accused is very much important, as the P.W.1 witnessed the accused, while the alleged extortion was made by accused against himself. The non conduction of Test Identification Parade of the accused through P.W.1 by P.W.4 i.e., Investigation officer is a big fatal to the prosecution for identification of the accused. It is well settled law, the identification of the accused is most important, when the defacto complainant witnessed the accused, while attempt the offence. The P.W.1 identified the accused in the court hall, unless, corroborated with the Test Identification Parade of the accused, the identification of the accused by the

P.W.1 in the court hall did not given any evidence value to the prosecution to prove the case beyond all reasonable doubt.

20. The lapses of P.W.4 i.e., not deposing the evidence in the proper manner, as well as non conducting the test identification parade though, the charged offence is in a severe nature, which is punishable extended up to 10 years, under sec. 386 of I.P.C., I feel it necessary to extract the Sec. 386 of IPC for better under stood.

Under Sec. 386 of I.P.C.

Extortion by putting a person in fear of death or grievous hurt : -

Whoever commits extortion by putting any person in fear of death or of

grievous hurt to that person or to any other, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to ten years, and shall also be liable to fine.

21.The Section itself shown, the gravity and severity of the offence, if the investigation officer deposed in the proper line of his chief examination, as well as conducting the Test Identification Parade of the accused through the P.W.1, certainly the prosecution able to prove their case beyond all reasonable doubt, and it is a fit case for conviction of the accused. The P.W.4, who is the investigation officer in this case, giving a clear acquittal to the accused with the above said reasons.

So, the prosecution utterly failed to prove the case against the accused, beyond all reasonable doubt. Hence, it is fit case to send the copy to the Superintendent of police for taking necessary action against P.W.4 / M. Saidu Babu S.I. of Police.

22.In the result, Accused is found not guilty for the offences u/Sec. 386 of I.P.C.,

Accordingly, the accused is acquitted u/Sec.248 (1) Cr.P.C. The bail bonds of the accused shall remain in force for the next six months, as required u/Sec. 437-A Cr.P.C.

The seized property i.e., Auto under CPR. No.140 / 23 already returned to the petitioner vide Crl.M.P. No. 682/2023, dt. 18.10.2023.

Typed to my dictation by the Stenographer – Grade - III, corrected and pronounced by me in the open Court on this the 23 rd day of November, 2023.

Sd/- G.V.L. Saraswathi,

Judicial Magistrate of First Class,

Darsi.

Appendix of evidence

Witnesses examined for

Prosecution: Defence:

PW.1: K. Srinivasa Rao -None-

PW.2: I.Pitchi Reddy

PW.3: T. Harinarayana

PW.4: M. Saidu babu

Exhibits marked for

Prosecution:

Ex. P.1 is the report,

Ex. P.2 is the confession and seizure mediator nama dt. 07.09.2023,

Ex. P.3 is the scene observation report,

Ex. P.4 is the F.I.R in Cr. No. 78/2023,

Ex. P. 5 is the rough sketch of the scene of offence

Defence :- NIL -

Material objects

M.O.1 : Bajaj Compact Auto Bearing No. AP 39 X 9827.

ILD/- G.V.L.S J.M.F.C., Darsi.

// True copy //

Judl. Magistrate of First Class,

Darsi.

// True copy //

Judl. Magistrate of First Class,

Darsi.

IN THE COURT OF THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS

:: DARSI ::

CALENDAR AND JUDGMENT IN C.C. No. 608 of 2023

(Crime No. 78/2023 of Donakonda Police Station)

1. Date of Offence: 23.07.2023

2. Date of Report: 29.07.2023

3. Date of taken on file: 30.10.2023

4. Date of arrest of accused: 08.09.2023

5. Date of release: Judicial custody since 08.09.2023

6. Date of commencement of trial: 02.11.2023

7. Date of close of trial: 10.11.2023

8. Date of Judgment: 23.11.2023

9. Complainant: State: The Sub-Inspector of Police, Donakonda P.S.

10. Accused:

Erella Venkata Swamy, S/o. Balaiah, 35 years, Kamma by caste, R/o. Peddapadu village and mandal, Srikakulam District, Native of Rudrasamudram village in Donakonda mandal.

11. Offence/s: U/sec. 386 of IPC

12. Plea of accused: Pleaded not guilty

13. Finding of Court: Found not guilty

15. Sentence or Order: In the result, Accused is found not guilty for the offences u/Sec. 386 of Indian Penal Code. Accordingly, the accused is acquitted u/Sec.248 (1) Cr.P.C. The bail bonds of the accused shall remain in force for the next six months, as required u/Sec. 437-A Cr.P.C.Since no case property is seized, no order is passed to that affect. Explanation for delay: - This case was taken on file on 30.10.2023 for the offences u/Sec. 386 of IPC. On 31.10.2023, after appearance of accused, copies of all the documents furnished to him as required u/Sec.207 of Cr.P.C. On 31.10.2023, accused was examined u/Sec.239 Cr.P.C. On behalf of prosecution, PW.1 to PW.4 were examined and got marked Exs.P1 to P5. And M.O.1, After closure of the prosecution ev56idence, the accused was examined under sec. 313 of Cr.P.C., and explained incriminating material against the him, for which, he pleaded innocence. On 30.06.2022 Arguments heard and on 04.07.2022, Judgment (vide separate judgment) pronounced in open Court by acquitted the accused u/Sec.255 (1) of Cr.P.C. Hence the delay.

Judicial Magistrate of First Class,

Darsi

Copy submitted to : The Hon’ble I-Addl. District & Sessions Judge,Ongole

Copy to The Superintendent of Police, Prakasam District, Ongole.

// True copy //

Judl. Magistrate of First Class,

Darsi.

1

O.S 235 of 2022

IN THE COURT OF THE JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE, DARSI

Present: Smt. G.V.L.Saraswathi, Junior Civil Judge, Darsi.

Wednesday , this the Twenty second ( 22 nd ) day of November, 2023.

O.S.No. 235 of 20 22

Between:

Oggu Venkata Pavan Kumar, S/o Venkata Rama Murthy, Age: 50, Hindu, Business,

R/o Darsi town and post and Mandal, Prakasam District.

... Plaintiff

V/s

Gangisetty Satyanarayana, S/o Gelaiah, Age: 40, Hindu, Seasonal business, R/o

Mareddyvaripalli village of D-Chandaluru post, via Kurichedu, Darsi Mandal, Prakasam

District.

... Defendant

This Suit is coming on 22.11.2023 for final hearing before me in the presence of

Sri.G.T.S.S., Advocate for the Plaintiff, and of Sri. Y.P.R., Advocate for defendant, and the matter having stood over till this day for consideration, and upon considering the entire material on record, this Court delivered the following:-

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

1.This is a suit filed by the plaintiff against the defendant for recovery of an amount of Rs. 2,35,640/- ( Rs. Two Lakh thirty five thousand six hundred and forty only) being the principle and interest due under the suit promissory note for Rs. 1,37,000/- dated 04.07.2019 and executed by the defendant in favour of the plaintiff, payable with interest at 24% p.a on the principal amount and for costs of the suit.

2. The averments of the plaint is as follows :

The defendant borrowed for an amount of Rs. 1,37,000/-, date 04.07.2019, from the plaintiff, for his family expenses and he executed promissory note in favour of the plaintiff on same day at Darsi (V) & Mandal, agreeing to repay the same along with interest at the rate of 24% p.a.

2

O.S 235 of 2022

Subsequently the plaintiff being in need of money demanded the defendant on several occasions to discharge the debt amount with interest due under the marked promissory note, but the defendant went on postponing the same with a view of evasion. Hence the plaintiff is constrained to file the suit for recovery of the suit amount due under the marked promissory note.

3.The defendant resisted the suit by filing a written statement. His case, in brief, is as follows:-

The defendant submitted his written statement, denied all averments in the plaint, in fact the plaintiff is running chit business and the defendant joined in chit run by the plaintiff as a member and disputes arose between the plaintiff and the defendant with regard to chit transaction. The plaintiff having grew wild against the defendant and created the suit promissory note by forging the signature of the defendant with the help of his association who are the attestor and scribe. The defendant is not liable to pay any suit amount to the plaintiff.

There is no cause of action or right of the suit for plaintiff to file a suit against the defendants. So it is prayed that the Hon’ble court may be pleased to dismiss the suit with the costs of the defendant.

4. Based on the above pleadings, the following issues are settled for trial:-

1. Whether the suit promissory note is supported by consideration true, valid and binding on the defendant ?

2. Whether plaintiff is entitled suit claim as prayed for ?

3. To what relief ?

5. In order to prove his case, the plaintiff himself examined as PW.1 and got marked

Exs.A1 i.e., Ex.A1 is the suit Promissory note, dated 04.07.2019, attestor and Scribe of

Ex. A1 namely S.Venkata Ramana, S.Venkata Rajeswa Rao are examined as PW.2 and 3.

6. On the other hand, the defendant examined himself as DW.1 and no documents are marked on his behalf.

7. Heard the learned counsel for both parties and perused the material on record.

After going through the contents of both parties coupled with the evidence and documents, this court for the better appreciation of the case, it is not necessary to reproduce the entire oral or documentary evidence and it will discuss as and when require to the extent required.

3

O.S 235 of 2022

ISSUE Nos. 1 and 2 :

8.It being a suit filed on the foot of promissory notes set have been executed by the defendant in favour of the plaintiff, though the presumption U/s.118 of Negotiable

Instruments Act is available in favour of the plaintiff, however, as per the provision the initial burden is always on the plaintiff to establish the execution and passing consideration thereon it.

9.To sure-up the contents of the plaintiff, the plaintiff examined as PW.1, the attestor, scribe of Ex.A1 are examined as PW.2 & 3 namely S.Venkata Ramana,

S.V.Rajeswawarao.

10.The cross examination of PW.1 to 3, they are very emphatic, the defendant borrowed an amount of Rs.1,37,000/- on 04.07.2019 under Ex.A1, the PW.1 deposed the defendant known since 7 – 8 years, the defendant read and write. Since 5 years there is a relation ship with money transaction between the plaintiff and defendant. The

PW.2 deposed he know the defendant since 6 years as well as they are purchased fertilizers at the shop of accused. The PW.3 deposed he had no idea in which language the defendant signed in Ex.A1 but the PW.1 signed on Ex.A1 before signed of defendant.

11.On the other hand though the defendant took specific plea forged signature of himself under Ex.A1, because of previous disputes.

To prove the said fact, the defendant himself examined as DW.1 and his chief contents nothing but replica of written statement, once the plaintiff discharged his burden by executing Ex.A1 promissory note and examined as attestor / PW.2, scribe of / PW.3 the burden shifts on the defendant to make establish his signature was forged by the plaintiff with his association. Neither take any steps nor approach before expert for testing his signature with their admitted signature. So, the defendant failed to discharge his burden laid on him.

12.As seen from the aforesaid fact elicited in the cross examination of PWs.1 to 3, it is discernible that the witness is emphatic regarding all material facts and for that matter it depicted even the minute details regarding the suit promissory note transaction took place at Darsi Village and Mandal. So, the evidence of PWs.1 to 3 are consistent on all 4

O.S 235 of 2022

material fronts. The defendant failed to point out either information or discrepancy regarding any material fact touching the promissory notes transaction. I do not find any where regarding material fact nor find any UN-naturality in their evidence. So, their evidence therefore inspires confidence in the mind of the Court. Hence, the suit promissory note Ex. A1 is valid and binding on the defendant.

13.Hence, the suit promissory notes Ex.A1 is valid and binding on the defendant,

Hence, issues are answered in favour of the plaintiff against the defendant.

ISSUE No. 3:

14. In the result, the suit is decreed with costs against the defendant for recovery of an amount of Rs. 2,35,640/- ( Rs. Two lakh thirty five thousand six hundred and forty only) with subsequent interest at the rate of 12% p.a from the date of suit till the date of decree and thereafter at the rate of 6% p.a till the date of realization on principle amount of Rs. 1,37,000/- (Rupees One lakh and thirty seven thousand only).

Typed to my dictation to the Typist, corrected and pronounced by me in Open Court, this the 22nd day of Nov - 2023.

Junior Civil Judge, Darsi.

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

WITNESSES EXAMINED

For Plaintiff For Defendant:- PW.1 Oggu Venkata Pavan KumarDW.1: Gangisetty Satyanarayana PW.2 Siramsetty Venkata Ramana Pw.3 Siramsetty Venkata Rajeswara Rao

Documents marked on behalf plaintiff:

Ex.A1: Suit Promissory note, dated 04.07.2019, for an amount of Rs. 1,37,000/-

Documents marked on behalf of Defendant:

- NIL -

J.C.J., Darsi.

OS 235 of 2022

IN THE COURT OF THE JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE, DARSI

Present: Smt. G.V.L.Saraswathi, Junior Civil Judge, Darsi.

Wednesday , this the Twenty second ( 22 nd ) day of November, 2023.

O.S.No. 235 of 20 22

Between:

Oggu Venkata Pavan Kumar, S/o Venkata Rama Murthy, Age: 50, Hindu, Business,

R/o Darsi town and post and Mandal, Prakasam District.

... Plaintiff

V/s

Gangisetty Satyanarayana, S/o Gelaiah, Age: 40, Hindu, Seasonal business, R/o

Mareddyvaripalli village of D-Chandaluru post, via Kurichedu, Darsi Mandal, Prakasam

District.

... Defendant

1.This is a suit filed by the plaintiff against the defendant for recovery of an amount of Rs. 2,35,640/- ( Rs. Two Lakh thirty five thousand six hundred and forty only) being the principle and interest due under the suit promissory note for Rs.

1,37,000/- dated 04.07.2019 and executed by the defendant in favour of the plaintiff, payable with interest at 24% p.a on the principal amount and for costs of the suit.

Cause of action :- Cause of action for the suit arose on 04.07.2019 when the defendant borrowed an amount of Rs. 1,37,000/-, from the plaintiff and executed suit promissory note respectively from the plaintiff agreeing to repay the sme with interest at 24% p.a and when the defendant failed to discharge the debt amount with interest in spite of repeated demands made by the plaintiff for repayment of the debts mentioned above at Darsi Town and Mandal, this court has got territorial jurisdiction to try the suit.

Valuation and Court Fee:- For the purpose of court fee and jurisdiction the suit is valued at Rs. 2,35,640/-, on which a court fee of Rs.4,826/- is paid U/Sec. 20 of

A.P.C.F. & S.V. Act.

Plaint presented on : 04.07.2022

Plaint registered on : 04.07.2022

This Suit is coming on 22.11.2023 for final hearing before me in the presence of Sri.G.T.S.S., Advocate for the Plaintiff, and of Sri. Y.P.R, Advocate

OS 235 of 2022

for defendant, and the matter having stood over till this day for consideration, and upon considering the entire material on record, till this day, the court doth order and decree:-

I. that the defendant do pay to the plaintiff a sum of Rs.2,35,640/- with subsequent interest at the rate of 12% p.a., from the date of filing of the suit till the date of decree and @ 6% p.a., from the date of decree till the date of realization on the principal amount of Rs. 1,37,000/- and;

II. that the defendant do also pay to the plaintiff a sum of Rs: 13,772/- towards institutional costs of the suit and that the defendant do bear his own costs of Rs. NIL ( No bill of costs filed).

Given under my hand and the seal of the court, this the 22 nd day of Nove, 2023.

JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE,

DARSI.

TABLE OF COSTS

For Plaintiff For Defendant Rs. Rs.

1.For Vakalat2-00

2.For Plaint fee4,826-00

No bill costs of filed,

3.Process 75-00

4.Advocate Fee 8,769-00

5.Typing Charges 100-00

TOTAL 13,772-00 ---

J.C.J, Darsi.

NOTE: - The parties should apply as soon as possible for the return of all exhibits, which they may wish to preserve as the record will be liable to be destroyed after three years from this date.

O.S 217 of 2023 1

IN THE COURT OF THE JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT DARSI

Present: Smt. G.V.L. Saraswathi,

Junior Civil Judge, Darsi.

Wednesday , this the Twenty Second ( 22 nd ) day of November , 2023

O S. No. 217 of 20 23

Between: Palukuri Pedda Venkateswarlu @ Chiddaiah S/o Papaiah, Age: 45, Hindu, Cultiva- tion, R/o Manginapudi village of Donakonda mandal, Prakasam District.

... Plaintiff

V/s

Rachagorla Pedda Rajaiah S/o Chinna Avulaiah, Age: 42, Hindu, Business and land holder, R/o Manginipudi village of Donakonda Mandal, Prakasam District.

... Defendant

This suit is coming on 22.11.2023 before me for final hearing in the presence of

Sri.M.R.L., Advocate for the Plaintiff and the defendant is set ex-parte, and upon perus- ing the material available on record, and upon hearing the arguments and having stood over for consideration to this day, this Court delivered the the following:-

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

1.This is a suit filed by the plaintiff against defendant for recovery an amount of Rs.

2,72,161/- ( Rs. Two Lakh seventy two thousand one hundred and sixty one only ) being the principle and interest due under the suit promissory note dated 23.07.2020, for

Rs.2,08,500/- ( Rs. Two Lakh eight thousand and five hundred only) and executed by the defendant in favour of the plaintiff, payable with interest at 24% p.a on the principal amount and for costs of the suit.

2. The brief averments of the plaint are as follows:

The defendant borrowed amount cash of Rs.2,08,500/- ( in three occasions ) I.e 70,000/- + 70,000/- and 68,500/- from the plaintiff on 15.05.2022 on same date, for his family expenses and duly executed suit promissory note, the said transaction happened at Manginipudi village of Donakonda Mandal, in favor of the plaintiff, agreeing to repay the same with interest at the rate of 24 % p.a payable to the plaintiff or his order on de- mand.

Subsequently, the plaintiff being in need money demanded the defendant on sev- eral occasions to discharge the debt amount with interest, but the defendant went on

O.S 217 of 2023 2

postponing the same with a view of evasion. Hence the plaintiff is constrained to file the suit for recovery of the suit amount.

3.Summons of defendant served, called absent, no representation, hence set ex- parte on 21.11.2023.

4.Thereafter, the matter was proceeded for ex-parte plaintiff evidence. The plaintiff led his ex-parte evidence in which he examined himself as PW.1 and Ex.A1 to A3 are marked on his behalf, I.e Ex.A1 to A3 are the suit promissory notes dt: 15.05.2022, for

Rs.70,000/- + 70,000/- + 68,500/-.

Thereafter, plaintiff closed his ex-parte evidence and matter was proceeded for ex-parte final arguments.

5.I have heard the ex-parte final arguments and carefully perused the documents placed on record.

6.Now, the points for consideration are:

1. Whether the plaintiff is entitled to recover the suit amounts from the defen- dant as prayed for?

2. To what relief?

ANSWER TO POINT NO.1 :

7.I have carefully gone through the oral and documentary evidence adduced by the plaintiff. The plaintiff examined himself as PW.1 and reiterated contents of plaint in his chief-examination affidavit and further got exhibited document A1 to A3 are on his be- half. The evidence of PW.1 is found to be consistent, cogent and trustworthy. The un- challenged testimony of PW.1,coupled with Exs.A1 to A3 are prove suit claim. Hence, the suit of plaintiff is liable to be decreed with costs. The point is answered accordingly.

ANSWER TO POINT NO.2 :

8. IN THE RESULT, the suit of the plaintiff is decreed with cost against the defen- dant for a sum of Rs. 2,72,161/- (Rs. Two Lakh seventy two thousand one hundred and sixty one only) and with subsequent interest at the rate of 12% p.a from the date of filing of the suit till date of decree there after 6% till realization on principal amounts i.e., Rs. 2,08,500/- (Rs. Two lakh eight thousand and five hundred only).

Typed to my dictation by the Typist of this Court, corrected and pronounced by me in open Court, this the 22 nd day of November, 2023.

Junior Civil Judge, Darsi

O.S 217 of 2023 3

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

WITNESSES EXAMINED

For Plaintiff: For Defendant:

PW.1: Palukuri Pedda Venkateswarlu @ Chiddaiah - Ex - Parte -

EXHIBITS MARKED

For Plaintiff:

Ex.A1: Suit promissory note dt: 15.05.2022, for Rs.70,000/-.

Ex.A2: Suit promissory note dt: 15.05.2022, for Rs.70,000/-.

Ex.A3: Suit promissory note dt: 15.05.2022, for Rs.68,500/-.

For Defendant: Nil

J.C.J., Darsi

O.S 217 of 2023 4

IN THE COURT OF THE JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT DARSI

Present: Smt. G.V.L. Saraswathi,

Junior Civil Judge, Darsi.

Wednesday , this the Twenty Second ( 22 nd ) day of November , 2023

O S. No. 217 of 20 23

Between: Palukuri Pedda Venkateswarlu @ Chiddaiah S/o Papaiah, Age: 45, Hindu, Cultiva- tion, R/o Manginapudi village of Donakonda mandal, Prakasam District.

... Plaintiff

V/s

Rachagorla Pedda Rajaiah S/o Chinna Avulaiah, Age: 42, Hindu, Business and land holder, R/o Manginipudi village of Donakonda Mandal, Prakasam District.

... Defendant

This is a suit filed by the plaintiff against defendant for recovery an amount of Rs.

2,72,161/- ( Rs. Two Lakh seventy two thousand one hundred and sixty one only ) being the principle and interest due under the suit promissory note dated 23.07.2020, for

Rs.2,08,500/- ( Rs. Two Lakh eight thousand and five hundred only) and executed by the defendant in favour of the plaintiff, payable with interest at 24% p.a on the principal amount and for costs of the suit.

Cause of action :- Cause of action for the suit arose on 23.07.2020, for Rs.2,08,500/-, when the defendant borrowed money from the plaintiff and duly executed a promissory note in his favour, and subsequently when the defendant failed to discharge the debt amount with interest in-spite of repeated demands made by the plaintiff. The same hav- ing arisen at Manginapudi Village of Donakonda Mandal, this Court has got territorial ju- risdiction to try the suit.

Valuation and Court Fee:- For the purpose of court fee and jurisdiction the suit is val- ued at Rs. 2,72,161/-, on which a court fee of Rs. 9,718/- is paid U/Sec. 20 of A.P.C.F. &

S.V. Act.

Plaint presented on : 23.08.2023

Plaint registered on : 23.08.2023

This suit is coming on 22.11.2023 before me for final hearing in the presence of

Sri.M.R.L., Advocate for the Plaintiff and the defendant is set ex-parte, and upon perus- ing the material available on record, and upon hearing the arguments and having stood over for consideration to this day, the court doth order and decree:- i.that the defendant do pay to the plaintiff a sum of Rs. 2,72,161/- and with subsequent interest at the rate of 12% p.a from the date of filing of the suit till date of decree there after 6% till realization on principal amount i.e.,Rs.

2,08,500/- (Rs. Two Lakh eight thousand and fife hundred only); and;

O.S 217 of 2023 5

ii. that the defendant do also pay to the plaintiff a sum of Rs.14,812 /- towards, costs of the suit and do bear his own costs .

Given under my hand and the seal of the court, this the 22 nd day of November, 2023.

JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE,

DARSI

TABLE OF COSTS

For Plaintiff For Defendant Rs. Rs.

1.For Vakalat2-00

2.For Plaint fee 9,718-00

3.Process60-00Ex-parte

4.Advocate Fee4,932-00

5.Typing Charges100-00

TOTAL 14,812-00 ---

J.C.J., DARSI

N.B. :- The parties are hereby directed to take back the Exhibited documents and non-exhibited docu ments which are marked in the suit within one month time with an undertaking to produce the same as and when required by the court.

O.S 263 of 2023 1

IN THE COURT OF THE JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT DARSI

Present: Smt. G.V.L. Saraswathi,

Junior Civil Judge, Darsi.

Wednesday , this the Twenty Second ( 22 nd ) day of November , 2023

O S. No. 263 of 20 23

Between: Gurram Bala Koteswara Rao S/o Venkata Subbaiah, Age: 60, Hindu, Business and

Land holder, R/o East Gangavaram village of Thalluru mandal, Prakasam District.

... Plaintiff

V/s

Thumu Venkata Subba Reddy S/o Kamireddy, Age: 52, Hindu, Business by profes- sion, R/o Lakkavaram village of Thalluru Mandal, Prakasam District.

... Defendant

This suit is coming on 22.11.2023 before me for final hearing in the presence of

Sri.M.R.L., Advocate for the Plaintiff and the defendant is set ex-parte, and upon perus- ing the material available on record, and upon hearing the arguments and having stood over for consideration to this day, this Court delivered the the following:-

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

1.This is a suit filed by the plaintiff against defendant for recovery an amount of Rs.

4,46,600/- ( Rs. Four lakh forty six thousand and six hundred only ) being the principle and interest due under the suit promissory note dated 05.10.2020, for Rs.2,90,000/- ( Rs. Two Lakh ninety thousand only) and executed by the defendant in favour of the plaintiff, payable with interest at 18% p.a on the principal amount and for costs of the suit.

2. The brief averments of the plaint are as follows:

The defendant borrowed amount cash of Rs.2,90,000/- from the plaintiff on 05.10.2020, for his family expenses and duly executed suit promissory note, the said transaction happened at East Gangavaram village of Thalluru Mandal, in favor of the plaintiff, agreeing to repay the same with interest at the rate of 18 % p.a payable to the plaintiff or his order on demand.

Subsequently, the plaintiff being in need money demanded the defendant on sev- eral occasions to discharge the debt amount with interest, but the defendant went on postponing the same with a view of evasion. Hence the plaintiff is constrained to file the suit for recovery of the suit amount.

O.S 263 of 2023 2

3.Summons of defendant served, called absent, no representation, hence set ex- parte on 21.11.2023.

4.Thereafter, the matter was proceeded for ex-parte plaintiff evidence. The plaintiff led his ex-parte evidence in which he examined himself as PW.1 and Ex.A1 is marked on his behalf, I.e Ex.A1 is the suit promissory note dt: 05.10.2020, for Rs.2,90,000/-.

Thereafter, plaintiff closed his ex-parte evidence and matter was proceeded for ex-parte final arguments.

5.I have heard the ex-parte final arguments and carefully perused the documents placed on record.

6.Now, the points for consideration are:

1. Whether the plaintiff is entitled to recover the suit amount from the defen- dant as prayed for?

2. To what relief?

ANSWER TO POINT NO.1 :

7.I have carefully gone through the oral and documentary evidence adduced by the plaintiff. The plaintiff examined himself as PW.1 and reiterated contents of plaint in his chief-examination affidavit and further got exhibited document A1 is on his behalf. The evidence of PW.1 is found to be consistent, cogent and trustworthy. The unchallenged testimony of PW.1,coupled with Exs.A1 is prove suit claim. Hence, the suit of plaintiff is liable to be decreed with costs. The point is answered accordingly.

ANSWER TO POINT NO.2 :

8. IN THE RESULT, the suit of the plaintiff is decreed with cost against the defen- dant for a sum of Rs. 4,46,600/- (Rs. Four Lakh forty six thousand and six hundred only) and with subsequent interest at the rate of 12% p.a from the date of filing of the suit till date of decree there after 6% till realization on principal amounts i.e., Rs.

2,90,000/- (Rs. Two lakh and ninety thousand only).

Typed to my dictation by the Typist of this Court, corrected and pronounced by me in open Court, this the 22 nd day of November, 2023.

Junior Civil Judge, Darsi

O.S 263 of 2023 3

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

WITNESSES EXAMINED

For Plaintiff: For Defendant:

PW.1: Gurram Bala Koteswara Rao - Ex - Parte -

EXHIBITS MARKED

For Plaintiff:

Ex.A1: Suit promissory note dt: 05.10.2010, for Rs.2,90,000 /-

For Defendant: Nil

J.C.J., Darsi

O.S 263 of 2023 4

IN THE COURT OF THE JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT DARSI

Present: Smt. G.V.L. Saraswathi,

Junior Civil Judge, Darsi.

Wednesday , this the Twenty Second ( 22 nd ) day of November , 2023

O S. No. 263 of 20 23

Between: Gurram Bala Koteswara Rao S/o Venkata Subbaiah, Age: 60, Hindu, Business and

Land holder, R/o East Gangavaram village of Thalluru mandal, Prakasam District.

... Plaintiff

V/s

Thumu Venkata Subba Reddy S/o Kamireddy, Age: 52, Hindu, Business by profes- sion, R/o Lakkavaram village of Thalluru Mandal, Prakasam District.

... Defendant

This is a suit filed by the plaintiff against defendant for recovery an amount of Rs.

4,46,600/- ( Rs. Four lakh forty six thousand and six hundred only ) being the principle and interest due under the suit promissory note dated 05.10.2020, for Rs.2,90,000/- ( Rs. Two Lakh ninety thousand only) and executed by the defendant in favour of the plaintiff, payable with interest at 18% p.a on the principal amount and for costs of the suit.

Cause of action :- Cause of action for the suit arose on 05.10.2020, for Rs.2,90,000/-, when the defendant borrowed money from the plaintiff and duly executed a promissory note in his favour, and subsequently when the defendant failed to discharge the debt amount with interest in-spite of repeated demands made by the plaintiff. The same hav- ing arisen at East Gangavaram Village of Thalluru Mandal, this Court has got territorial jurisdiction to try the suit.

Valuation and Court Fee:- For the purpose of court fee and jurisdiction the suit is val- ued at Rs. 4,46,600/-, on which a court fee of Rs. 6,926/- is paid U/Sec. 20 of A.P.C.F. &

S.V. Act.

Plaint presented on : 05.10.2023

Plaint registered on : 05.10.2023

This suit is coming on 22.11.2023 before me for final hearing in the presence of

Sri.M.R.L., Advocates for the Plaintiff and the defendant is set ex-parte, and upon pe- rusing the material available on record, and upon hearing the arguments and having stood over for consideration to this day, the court doth order and decree:- i.that the defendant do pay to the plaintiff a sum of Rs. 4,46,600/- and with subsequent interest at the rate of 12% p.a from the date of filing of the suit till date of decree there after 6% till realization on principal amount i.e.,Rs.

2,90,000/- (Rs. Two Lakh and ninety thousand only); and;

O.S 263 of 2023 5

ii. that the defendant do also pay to the plaintiff a sum of Rs.14,637 /- towards, costs of the suit and do bear his own costs .

Given under my hand and the seal of the court, this the 22 nd day of November, 2023.

JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE,

DARSI

TABLE OF COSTS

For Plaintiff For Defendant Rs. Rs.

1.For Vakalat2-00

2.For Plaint fee 6,926-00

3.Process60-00Ex-parte

4.Advocate Fee7,549-00

5.Typing Charges100-00

TOTAL 14,637-00 ---

J.C.J., DARSI

N.B. :- The parties are hereby directed to take back the Exhibited documents and non-exhibited docu ments which are marked in the suit within one month time with an undertaking to produce the same as and when required by the court.

O.S 200 of 2023 1

IN THE COURT OF THE JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT DARSI

Present: Smt. G.V.L. Saraswathi,

Junior Civil Judge, Darsi.

Wednesday , this the Twenty Second ( 22 nd ) day of November , 2023

O S. No. 200 of 20 23

Between: Munaga Venkateswarlu S/o Bala Kotaiah, Age: 63, Hindu, Business, R/o Darsi town and mandal, Prakasam District.

... Plaintiff

V/s

Andra Thirupathaiah S/o Govindarao, Age: 43, Hindu, Govt. employee, R/o , O/o

Government B.C Boys Hostel, Santhanuthalapadu village and mandal, Prakasam Dis- trict.

... Defendant

This suit is coming on 22.11.2023 before me for final hearing in the presence of

Sri.M.V.S.K., Advocate for the Plaintiff and the defendant is set ex-parte, and upon pe- rusing the material available on record, and upon hearing the arguments and having stood over for consideration to this day, this Court delivered the the following:-

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

1.This is a suit filed by the plaintiff against defendant for recovery an amount of Rs.

6,02,000/- ( Rs. Six lakh and two thousand only ) being the principle and interest due under the suit promissory note dated 01.08.2020, for Rs.3,50,000/- ( Rs. Three Lakh and fifty thousand only) and executed by the defendant in favour of the plaintiff, payable with interest at 24% p.a on the principal amount and for costs of the suit.

2. The brief averments of the plaint are as follows:

The defendant borrowed amount cash of Rs.3,50,000/- from the plaintiff on 01.08.2020, for his family expenses and duly executed suit promissory note, the said transaction happened at Darsi town and Mandal, in favor of the plaintiff, agreeing to re- pay the same with interest at the rate of 24 % p.a payable to the plaintiff or his order on demand.

Subsequently, the plaintiff being in need money demanded the defendant on sev- eral occasions to discharge the debt amount with interest, but the defendant went on postponing the same with a view of evasion. Hence the plaintiff is constrained to file the suit for recovery of the suit amount.

O.S 200 of 2023 2

3.Summons of defendant served, called absent, no representation, hence set ex- parte on 20.10.2023.

4.Thereafter, the matter was proceeded for ex-parte plaintiff evidence. The plaintiff led his ex-parte evidence in which he examined himself as PW.1 and Ex.A1 is marked on his behalf, I.e Ex.A1 is the suit promissory note dt: 01.08.2020, for Rs.3,50,000/-.

Thereafter, plaintiff closed his ex-parte evidence and matter was proceeded for ex-parte final arguments.

5.I have heard the ex-parte final arguments and carefully perused the documents placed on record.

6.Now, the points for consideration are:

1. Whether the plaintiff is entitled to recover the suit amount from the defen- dant as prayed for?

2. To what relief?

ANSWER TO POINT NO.1 :

7.I have carefully gone through the oral and documentary evidence adduced by the plaintiff. The plaintiff examined himself as PW.1 and reiterated contents of plaint in his chief-examination affidavit and further got exhibited document A1 is on his behalf. The evidence of PW.1 is found to be consistent, cogent and trustworthy. The unchallenged testimony of PW.1,coupled with Exs.A1 is prove suit claim. Hence, the suit of plaintiff is liable to be decreed with costs. The point is answered accordingly.

ANSWER TO POINT NO.2 :

8. IN THE RESULT, the suit of the plaintiff is decreed with cost against the defen- dant for a sum of Rs. 6,02,000/- (Rs. Six Lakh and two thousand only) and with sub- sequent interest at the rate of 12% p.a from the date of filing of the suit till date of de- cree there after 6% till realization on principal amounts i.e., Rs. 3,50,000/- (Rs. Three lakh and fifty thousand only).

Typed to my dictation by the Typist of this Court, corrected and pronounced by me in open Court, this the 22 nd day of November, 2023.

Junior Civil Judge, Darsi

O.S 200 of 2023 3

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

WITNESSES EXAMINED

For Plaintiff: For Defendant:

PW.1: Munaga Venkateswarlu - Ex - Parte -

EXHIBITS MARKED

For Plaintiff:

Ex.A1: Suit promissory note dt: 01.08.2020, for Rs.3,50,000 /-

For Defendant: Nil

J.C.J., Darsi

O.S 200 of 2023 4

IN THE COURT OF THE JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT DARSI

Present: Smt. G.V.L. Saraswathi,

Junior Civil Judge, Darsi.

Wednesday , this the Twenty Second ( 22 nd ) day of November , 2023

O S. No. 200 of 20 23

Between: Munaga Venkateswarlu S/o Bala Kotaiah, Age: 63, Hindu, Business, R/o Darsi town and mandal, Prakasam District.

... Plaintiff

V/s

Andra Thirupathaiah S/o Govindarao, Age: 43, Hindu, Govt. employee, R/o , O/o

Government B.C Boys Hostel, Santhanuthalapadu village and mandal, Prakasam Dis- trict.

... Defendant

This is a suit filed by the plaintiff against defendant for recovery an amount of Rs.

6,02,000/- ( Rs. Six lakh and two thousand only ) being the principle and interest due under the suit promissory note dated 01.08.2020, for Rs.3,50,000/- ( Rs. Three Lakh and fifty thousand only) and executed by the defendant in favour of the plaintiff, payable with interest at 24% p.a on the principal amount and for costs of the suit.

Cause of action :- Cause of action for the suit arose on 01.08.2020, for Rs.3,50,000/-, when the defendant borrowed money from the plaintiff and duly executed a promissory note in his favour, and subsequently when the defendant failed to discharge the debt amount with interest in-spite of repeated demands made by the plaintiff. The same hav- ing arisen at Darsi Village and Mandal, this Court has got territorial jurisdiction to try the suit.

Valuation and Court Fee:- For the purpose of court fee and jurisdiction the suit is val- ued at Rs. 6,02,000 /-, on which a court fee of Rs. 8,526/- is paid U/Sec. 20 of A.P.C.F.

& S.V. Act.

Plaint presented on : 31.07.2023

Plaint registered on : 31.07.2023

This suit is coming on 22.11.2023 before me for final hearing in the presence of

M.V.S.K., Advocate for the Plaintiff and the defendant is set ex-parte, and upon perus- ing the material available on record, and upon hearing the arguments and having stood over for consideration to this day, the court doth order and decree:- i.that the defendant do pay to the plaintiff a sum of Rs. 6,02,000/- and with subsequent interest at the rate of 12% p.a from the date of filing of the suit till date of decree there after 6% till realization on principal amount i.e.,Rs.

3,50,000/- (Rs. Three Lakh and fifty thousand only); and;

O.S 200 of 2023 5

ii. that the defendant do also pay to the plaintiff a sum of Rs.18,568 /- towards, costs of the suit and do bear his own costs .

Given under my hand and the seal of the court, this the 22 nd day of November , 2023.

JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE,

DARSI

TABLE OF COSTS

For Plaintiff For Defendant Rs. Rs.

1.For Vakalat2-00

2.For Plaint fee 8,526-00

3.Process60-00Ex-parte

4.Advocate Fee9,880-00

5.Typing Charges100-00

TOTAL 18,568 -00 ---

J.C.J., DARSI

N.B. :- The parties are hereby directed to take back the Exhibited documents and non-exhibited docu ments which are marked in the suit within one month time with an undertaking to produce the same as and when required by the court.