Smt K Rani

Page 1 of 18 ASCJ – cum – Addl.Asst.Sessions Judge, Karimnagar.

OS No.65 of 2019 (FAIR)

IN THE COURT OF THE ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE – CUM –

ADDITIONAL ASSISTANT SESSIONS JUDGE AT KARIMNAGAR.

Present:Smt. K.RANI, Addl. Senior Civil Judge – cum – Addl.Asst. Sessions Judge,

K A R I M N A G A R.

FRIDAY, THIS THE 24th DAY OF OCTOBER, 2025.

ORIGINAL SUIT No.65 of 2019.

Between: Gade Ramu S/o Chakrapani, Age:43 Years, Occ:Private Employee, R/o H.No.9- 3-219/1, Srinagar Colony, Karimnagar. … Plaintiff

A N D Puttapaka Srinivas S/o Rajaiah, Age:36 Years, Occ:Business R/o H.No.5-6- 123/2/2, Mallikharjuna Nilyam Housing Board Chowrasta, Maruthinagar locality, Karimnagar Town. … Defendant

This suit is coming on 08.10.2025 before me at the stage of final hearing in the presence of Sri. K.V.Venugopal Rao, Advocate for plaintiff and Sri Rai Kanakaiah, Advocate for defendant and having been heard and having stood over till this day for consideration, this Court delivered the following:

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

This suit has been filed by the plaintiff for recovery of hand loan amount of Rs.8,56,000/- (Rupees Eight Lakhs Fifty Six Thousands Only) together with interest (Rs.5,00,000/- principal amount and Rs.3,55,000/- Interest from 20.04.2016 to 06.04.2019 {35 months 15 days}), cost of legal notice of

Rs.1,000/- from defendant.

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

(a).The defendant introduced personally to plaintiff in the year, 2009 as being

Page 2 of 18 ASCJ – cum – Addl.Asst.Sessions Judge, Karimnagar.

OS No.65 of 2019 (FAIR)

real estate and finance business at Maruthinagar locality of Karimnagar town and become a good friend and maintain good faith and close intimacy with the plaintiff. On 04.05.2013, the defendant approached the plaintiff and asked hand loan for an amount of Rs.2,00,000/- for the purpose of business and family needs @ interest 24% per annum, for a period of one year or on demand of plaintiff.

That the plaintiff by agreeing the same paid amount of Rs.2,00,000/- (Rupees

Two Lakhs Only) through Cheque bearing No.003653 on 04.05.2013, drawn on

Central Bank of India, Karimnagar towards the said loan amount, the defendant executed a promissory note for a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- in the presence of two attestors namely G.Ramesh and R.Eshwar.

(b)That on 15.06.2013 again on the request of defendant, the plaintiff advanced Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh Only) in cash to defendant for the period of one year or on demand of the plaintiff, the defendant also executed promissory note for Rs.1,00,000/- separately apart from first loan amount of

Rs.2,00,000/-.

(c)Later on the demand of plaintiff to pay the due loan amount with interest, then the defendant got issued a cheque on 20.06.2013 bearing No.005474 drawn on Bank of India payable at Karimnagar for an amount of Rs.2,25,000/-, in part of principal loan amount of Rs.3,00,000/-. On presenting the said cheque by the

Page 3 of 18 ASCJ – cum – Addl.Asst.Sessions Judge, Karimnagar.

OS No.65 of 2019 (FAIR)

plaintiff in his bank, the same was returned for the reason "INSUFFICIENT

FUNDS". That on 20.09.2013 again the defendant got issued another cheque bearing No.032583, drawn on Union Bank of India at Karimnagar for amount of

Rs.2,18,000/- in part of principal loan amount of Rs.3,00,000/-. The defendant also issued third cheque on 30.09.2013 bearing No.032588, drawn on Union

Bank of India at Karimnagar for amount of Rs.2,00,000/- in part of principal loan amount of Rs.3,00,000/-. On presenting the said cheques by plaintiff, returned for the reason "INSUFFICIENT FUNDS". The plaintiff informed the same to defendant but he requested to pay the principal loan amount and interest of

Rs.3,00,000/- in one month.

(d)That the completion of said period, on the demand made by plaintiff for repayment of loan amount, the defendant got issued a cheque bearing No.003597

dated:16.06.2014 drawn on State Bank of India at Karimnagar for an amount of

Rs.3,76,000/- with interest, the same also returned. Then the plaintiff demanded the defendant but the defendant postponed the same and not paid said principal amount of Rs.3,00,000/-, with interest. The defendant finally came to the plaintiff house and requested further time to pay the said amount with interest and further defendant got executed promissory note on 20.04.2016 by calculating principal amount of Rs.3,00,000/- with interest its come to Rs.5,00,000/- in the presence of two attestors namely Khaja Masiuddin and B.Raju and defendant requested to

Page 4 of 18 ASCJ – cum – Addl.Asst.Sessions Judge, Karimnagar.

OS No.65 of 2019 (FAIR)

pay within six months, but defendant again failed to repay the said amount in time. Finally the defendant got issued a cheque bearing No.047910 for principal amount of Rs.5,00,000/- and asked to pay the interest later. On the request of defendant, plaintiff received the said cheque by accepting the same and presented in the bank but the same was also returned by the plaintiff bank namely Central

Bank of India, Karimnagar, with memo mentioned "FUNDS INSUFFICIENT".

(e)The plaintiff got issued a legal notice to defendant demanded to pay cheque amount within the time, but defendant not responded nor paid cheque amount. Then the plaintiff filed a complaint under the 138 of Negotiable

Instrument Act, unfortunately that the case was dismissed by the Special

Magistrate Court, Karimnagar on 04.01.2019 observed that the notice under

Section 138 of Negotiable Instrument Act un-served to the defendant and served to another person, the copy of judgment filed herewith.

(f)The plaintiff preferred an appeal against the impugned judgment passed by the Special Magistrate Court, Karimnagar, same was pending before the Hon'ble

High Court of Telangana at Hyderabad vide Criminal Appeal No.102 of 2019.

(g)On 18.02.2019 the plaintiff got issued a legal notice to the defendant through the Registered Post with Acknowledge due demanded to pay the

principal amount of Rs.5,00,000/- (Rupees Five Lakhs Only) together with

Page 5 of 18 ASCJ – cum – Addl.Asst.Sessions Judge, Karimnagar.

OS No.65 of 2019 (FAIR)

interest thereon at 24% per annum and Rs.1,000/- being cost of this legal notice, the said registered post is returned stating that the defendant unclaimed. The defendant even after knowing the legal notice he failed to pay the amount due to the plaintiff as demanded. The plaintiff is compelled to file this suit for amount of

Rs.8,56,000/- (Rupees Eight Lakhs Fifty Six Thousands Only) with interest.

Hence, the suit.

3.Summons were served on defendant. Defendant filed Written Statement by denying the plaint averments and further submitted that, the defendant is borrowed an amount of Rs.4,00,000/- (Rupees Four Lakhs Only) in twice and the plaintiff intentionally got executed a separate register GPA vide document

No.7566 of 2011 dated:09.08.2011 and after that the plaintiff illegally got executed a registered sale deed vide document No.12001 of 2013,

dated:18.11.2013 in favour of his wife namely Kotagiri Soujanya D/o Nagaiah

and not mentioned his name as a husband in the said sale deed but the said

Soujanya Aadhar card is clearly showing that, the said Soujanya is a wife of plaintiff and the matter is suppressed to the defendant, the defendant by approaching the plaintiff paid entire amounts to him, after that the plaintiff re- registered the defendant land properties through a registered GPA deed by his wife vide document No.10921 of 2015 dated:06.11.2015 after receipt of said all loan amounts. But the plaintiff not returned the said plaint promotes and blank

Page 6 of 18 ASCJ – cum – Addl.Asst.Sessions Judge, Karimnagar.

OS No.65 of 2019 (FAIR)

cheques to the defendant and created concocted stories and requested the defendant to return the said all documents after the trace out and made defendant to believe and got executed a registered sale deed by plaintiff's wife in defendant's favour and the defendant filed certified copies of documents along with his written statement.

3(i)The defendant came to know that the present suit is decreed in favour of the plaintiff and the defendant approached his counsel and filed a petition

I.A.No.79 of 2021 and I.A.No.80 of 2021 and the same are allowed by this Court with cost of Rs.10,000/- and the said amount is paid to the plaintiff and after that said I.A.s are allowed and the plaintiff is filed a separate Execution Petition No.9 of 2021 and Execution Petition No.21 of 2021 are dismissed which is filed by the plaintiff after getting this suit in exparte orders.

3(ii)That the plaintiff with illegal and malafied intention filed this false suit by non returning the said promotes and cheques to the defendant and the plaintiff suppressed material facts and approached this Court with mud hands. That the plaintiff is not entitled for the suit amount and prayed to dismiss the suit with costs.

4.During the course of trial, plaintiff examined himself as PW1 and got marked Ex.A1 to A13. On behalf of plaintiff one Khaja Masisuddin examined as

Page 7 of 18 ASCJ – cum – Addl.Asst.Sessions Judge, Karimnagar.

OS No.65 of 2019 (FAIR)

PW.2. On the other hand the defendant examined himself as DW.1 and got marked Ex.B1 to B3. On behalf of defendant one Gadala Srinivas examined as

DW.2 and Devunuri Ramesh examined as DW.3.

5.Heard both sides and perused the material available on record, following issues are framed:

1. Whether the suit pro-note is valid and supported by any consideration?

2. Whether the plaintiff is entitled for recovery of money as prayed for?

3. To what relief?

Issue No. 1:

6.The plaintiff filed the suit against the defendant for recovery of loan amount. It is the claim of plaintiff that he advanced two lakhs and one lakh on two different dates to defendant. But, he failed to repay the loan amounts and subsequently he got issued cheques for the loan amounts, but unfortunately the said cheques was dishonoured. Thereafter, defendant approached him and executed a promissory note on 20.04.2016 for five lakhs including the principal amount of three lakhs along with interest. On 15.05.2017 defendant got issued a cheque for rupees five lakhs, but it was dishonoured, for which he issued the legal notice, then he filed complaint under section 138 of NI Act and same was dismissed on 04.01.2019. Plaintiff got filed the present suit against the defendant for recovery of the loan amount along with the interest.

Page 8 of 18 ASCJ – cum – Addl.Asst.Sessions Judge, Karimnagar.

OS No.65 of 2019 (FAIR)

7.To establish the suit claim, plaintiff got examined himself as PW.1 and one of the attestor for the promissory note dt:20.04.2016 namely Khaja Masisuddin examined as PW.2. PW.1 filed the chief affidavit in lieu of chief examination while re-iterating the averments of the plaint and got marked Ex.A1 to A13 documents to support his version. Ex.A1 is the original promissory note

Rs.2,00,000/- dated:04.05.2013 executed by defendant No.1 in favour of plaintiff, Ex.A2 is the plaintiff bank pass book of Central Bank of India,

Karimnagar, Ex.A3 is the original promissory note Rs.1,00,000/-, dated 15.06.2013 executed by defendant No.1 in favour of plaintiff, Ex.A4 is the cheque bearing No.005474, dated:20.06.2013 for Rs.2,25,000/- issued by defendant No.1 drawn on Bank of India, Karimnagar Branch, Ex.A5 is the cheque bearing No.032583, dated:20.09.2013 for Rs.2,18,000/- issued by defendant No.1 drawn on Union Bank of India, Karimnagar Branch, Ex.A6 is the cheque bearing No.032588, dated:30.09.2013 for Rs.2,00,000/- issued by defendant No.1 drawn on Union Bank of India, Karimnagar Branch, Ex.A7 is the cheque bearing No.003597, dated:16.06.2014 for Rs.3,76,000/- issued by defendant No.1 drawn on State Bank of India, Kaman Branch, Karimnagar,

Ex.A8 is the original promissory note Rs.5,00,000/-, dated:20.04.2016 executed by defendant No.1 in favour of plaintiff, Ex.A9 is the Certified Copy of Cheque bearing No.047910, dated:15.05.2017 for Rs.5 Lakhs issued by defendant No.1 drawn on State Bank of India, Karimnagar, Ex.A10 is the Office Copy of Legal

Page 9 of 18 ASCJ – cum – Addl.Asst.Sessions Judge, Karimnagar.

OS No.65 of 2019 (FAIR)

Notice, dated:18.02.2019, Ex.A11 is the Postal Receipt, dated:18.02.2019,

Ex.A12 is the registered postal cover of defendant No.1 and Ex.A13 is the

Certified Copy of Judgment in C.C.No.101/2018 on the file of Special Judicial

First Class Magistrate, Karimnagar.

8.Further stated in his chief affidavit that the defendant filed written statement admitting that he has borrowed hand loan of Rs.2 Lakhs on 09.08.2011. In fact defendant got executed General Power of Attorney for sale consideration of Rs.3,03,500/- but defendant trying to mix up different transactions to misguide and evade of suit amount.

9.PW.2 stated in his chief examination that he is one of the attester of the promissory note dated 20.04.2016. The defendant obtained an amount of

Rs.3,00,000/- from plaintiff in 2013 for the period of one year. After one year the defendant not paid and on demand made by plaintiff he postponed to repay the amount on the ground of non adjusted of amounts and request some more time.

Later on calculating interest on the principal amount of Rs.3,00,000/- its comes to Rs.5,00,000/- which agreed by defendant and got executed a promissory note on 20.04.2016 for sum of Rs.5,00,000/- in presence of him and one B.Raju. But the defendant failed to pay said amount with in time. On 18.02.2019 the plaintiff informed him that he has issued a legal notice to defendant through his counsel

Page 10 of 18 ASCJ – cum – Addl.Asst.Sessions Judge, Karimnagar.

OS No.65 of 2019 (FAIR)

for repayment of hand loan amount but the defendant failed to reply to legal notice nor paid the amount of Rs.8,56,000/-.

10.In chief affidavit filed by the defendant/DW1, he admitted that he has borrowed loan amount of Rs.2,00,000/- on 04.05.2013 from the plaintiff and on the demand of the plaintiff, he got issued promissory note and four plain cheques bearing No.005474 of bank of India, cheque No.032583 and 032588 of Union

Bank of India, cheque No.003597 of State Bank of India and four pro-notes with his signatures and revenue stamps affixed on the pro-notes towards collateral security. Further defendant also admitted that he borrowed Rs.1,00,000/- for his family and business needs and got executed promissory note for said loan amount. He further stated in his chief affidavit that he borrowed an amount of

Rs.2,00,000/- on 09.08.2011 from the plaintiff and on the same day he got executed a registered general power of attorney deed vide No.7566/2011 in the

Sub Registrar office at Karimnagar as collateral security and also given plain promissory note and blank cheque vide No.047910 with his signature on the said cheque and also promissory note.

11.He further stated that the plaintiff got executed registered sale deed in favour of his wife vide document No.12001/2013 dated 18.11.2013. On knowing the same, he approached the plaintiff and paid the entire loan amount along with

Page 11 of 18 ASCJ – cum – Addl.Asst.Sessions Judge, Karimnagar.

OS No.65 of 2019 (FAIR)

the interest, then the wife of plaintiff got executed General Power of Attorney vide document No.10921/2015, dated 06.11.2015 in his favour, but the plaintiff did not returned promissory notes and cheques which was handed over by him towards collateral security. Based on the said promissory note and cheque, the plaintiff filed the cheque bounce case and present suit for recovery of money, but cheque bounce case vide CC No.101/2018 was ended in acquittal.

12.It is the case of the plaintiff that he advanced loan to the defendant on two occasions which is admitted by the defendant. Plaintiff got marked

Ex.A1/Promissory note, dated 04.05.2013, Ex.A3/Promissory note, dated 15.06.2013 and Ex.A8/Promissory note, dated 20.04.2019. plaintiff with the oral and documentary evidence established that defendant has borrowed the loan amounts under Ex.A1 and Ex.A3 promissory notes, subsequently he got executed

Ex.A8 promissory note admitting the loans covered under Ex.A1 and Ex.A3 promissory notes, on his failure to repay the loan amount. Defendant is admitting about the obtaining of loan amounts covered under Ex.A1 and Ex.A3 promissory notes, but he has taken the defense that he has repaid the loan amounts including the loan which is obtained by him in the year 2011. As per his contention that he obtained the loan of Rs.2,00,000/- on 09.08.2011 and got executed registered general power of attorney as collateral security in favour of plaintiff for the said loan amount. But, plaintiff got executed registered sale deed in favour of his

Page 12 of 18 ASCJ – cum – Addl.Asst.Sessions Judge, Karimnagar.

OS No.65 of 2019 (FAIR)

wife in the year 2013. After repayment of loan amount along with the interest, the wife of plaintiff got executed general power of attorney in respect of same property in favour of defendant on 06.11.2015.

13.The defendant has categorically stated in his evidence that he has issued blank promissory notes and blank cheque containing his signatures to the plaintiff towards collateral security for the loans obtained by him from the plaintiff. Even after the receipt of loan amount along with the interest, the plaintiff with malafide intention has not returned the said promissory notes and blank cheques and got filed cheque bounce case and also the present suit for recovery of money. The defendant is not denying the signature appearing upon the cheques and also promissory notes, but he is denying the execution in favour of plaintiff for the loan amounts. Since he states that he got issued blank promissory notes and blank cheques towards collateral security.

14.When it is the contention of the defendant that he has repaid the loan amount, but he has not filed any of the documents showing that he has repaid the loan amount. Admittedly promissory notes and cheques are valuable instruments, which acknowledges the debts. Defendant has taken the plea that inspite of repayment of loan amount, plaintiff failed to return the cheques and promissory notes. Defendant has not stated whether he has taken any action against the

Page 13 of 18 ASCJ – cum – Addl.Asst.Sessions Judge, Karimnagar.

OS No.65 of 2019 (FAIR)

plaintiff seeking for the return of said promissory notes and cheques, such as issuance of legal notice or raising a report before any police station against the plaintiff. As per the written statement of the defendant that plaintiff got filed cheque bounce case against him and the same was dismissed on 04.01.2019. The said fact discloses that the legal proceedings has been instituted in between the plaintiff and defendant prior to the filing of this suit, since this suit has been filed on 08.04.2019. The failure of the defendant to take legal action against the plaintiff for recovery of his cheques and promissory notes held in the hands of plaintiff, goes against the defense taken by him. Since, defendant is well aware that plaintiff has been initiating legal proceedings against him based on the promissory notes and cheques in his custody.

15.Defendant examined himself as Dw.1 and two other witness as DW.2 and

DW.3. DW,.2 and DW.3 has deposed their evidence by way of chief affidavits and stated that they came to know that defendant has repaid the loan amount to the plaintiff, in turn, the wife of plaintiff has executed GPA in favour of defendant. As per the evidence of DW.2, he stated that defendant has obtained loan of Rs.3,03,500/- from the plaintiff and got executed GPA infavour of plaintiff but whereas DW.3 stated in his evidence that defendant has repaid an amount of Rs.3,79,100/- and plaintiff’s wife has re-transferred the property to the defendant. Defendant got marked Ex.B1 to show that the wife of plaintiff has re-

Page 14 of 18 ASCJ – cum – Addl.Asst.Sessions Judge, Karimnagar.

OS No.65 of 2019 (FAIR)

transferred the property on his name in the year 2015.DW.2 and DW.3 came to know about the repayment of loan amount by the defendant but they have not stated whether they were present at the time of repayment of loan amount by the defendant or not. It appears from their evidence that they do not have first hand knowledge about the repayment of loan amount but only they came to know about said information from the defendant.

16.Defendant has taken plea that he has repaid the loan amount which he obtain from the plaintiff but he did not mentioned date, time, place and amount and also the names of witnesses in whose presence the loan was repaid. As per defendant, he has hand over blank signed promissory notes and cheques to the plaintiff but plaintiff failed to return said promissory notes and cheques on payment of loan amount. Admittedly blank signed promissory notes and cheques are valuable instruments which creates liability on the signatory. Defendant has not assigned any reason for non return of said promissory note and cheques by the plaintiff and he also not mention whether he has taken any action against the plaintiff on the failure for non return of said documents. The in action of defendant against the plaintiff rises the suspicious about the repayment of loan amount to the plaintiff. The evidence of DW.3 shows that he was present at the time of re-transfer of property by the wife of plaintiff, but otherwise his evidence is of no use.

Page 15 of 18 ASCJ – cum – Addl.Asst.Sessions Judge, Karimnagar.

OS No.65 of 2019 (FAIR)

17.The defendant got marked Ex.B1 to B3 documents. Ex.B1 document is the

Agreement of Sale-cum-irrevocable General Power of Attorney vide document

No.7566/2011 dated:09.08.2011 executed by the defendant in favour of plaintiff in respect of plot No.92 situated in Sy.No.33 of Bommakal Village to the extent of 252.7 Sq.Yards. Ex.B2 document is the Sale deed vide document

No.12001/2013 dated:18.11.2013 executed by the plaintiff in favour of one

Kotagiri Soujanya in respect of same property i.e. plot No.92 situated in

Sy.No.33 of Bommakal Village to the extent of 252.7 Sq.Yards. Ex.B3 document is the Agreement of Sale-cum-irrevocable General Power of Attorney vide document No.10921/2015 dated:06.11.2015 executed by the said Kotagiri

Soujanya in favour of defendant in respect of same said property i.e. plot No.92 situated in Sy.No.33 of Bommakal Village to the extent of 252.7 Sq.Yards.

Therefore, Ex.B1 to B3 documents reveals that there are property dealings in between plaintiff and defendant in the years between 2011-2015.

18.Both DW.2 and DW.3 are the circumstantial witnesses and deposed their evidence based on the information given by some one. Further, in general, a prudent man discharging his liability acquires a receipt on payment or else takes back the instrument which creates liability on him. In the case on hand, the defendant neither filed any document showing that he has obtained receipt on

Page 16 of 18 ASCJ – cum – Addl.Asst.Sessions Judge, Karimnagar.

OS No.65 of 2019 (FAIR)

repayment of loan amount nor he has taken back the promissory notes and cheques alleged to be issued by him to the plaintiff towards collateral security.

19.In view of supra discussion, plaintiff by adducing oral and documentary evidence established that defendant borrowed Rs.8,56,000/- (Rupees Eight Lakhs

Fifty Six Thousands Only) from him and he is entitled to recover said loan amount along with interest from the defendant. Therefore, this issue is answered in favour of plaintiff and against defendant.

Issue No.2:

20.In view of the discussions in Issue No.1, the plaintiff is entitled for the suit amount along with the interest.

21.In the result, the suit is decreed with cost. The defendant is directed to pay an amount of Rs.8,56,000/- (Rupees Eight Lakhs Fifty Six Thousands Only) together with interest on principal amount within (45) days from this day, @12 % per annum from the date of suit till the date of decree and @6% per annum from the date of decree till the date of realization.

Typed to my dictation by Stenographer directly on Computer, corrected and pronounced by me, in the open court on this the 24 th day of October, 2025.

Addl. Senior Civil Judge - cum -Addl.Asst. Sessions Judge, Karimnagar.

Page 17 of 18 ASCJ – cum – Addl.Asst.Sessions Judge, Karimnagar.

OS No.65 of 2019 (FAIR)

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

WITNESS EXAMINED

FOR THE PLAINTIFF:FOR THE DEFENDANT:

PW.1Gade RamuDW.1Puttapaka Srinivas

PW.2Khaja MasisuddinDW.2Gadala Srinivas

DW.3Devunuri Ramesh

EXHIBITS MARKED

FOR THE PLAINTIFF:

Ex.A1is the original promissory note Rs.2,00,000/- dated:04.05.2013 executed by defendant No.1 in favour of plaintiff.

Ex.A2is the plaintiff bank pass book of Central Bank of India, Karimnagar.

Ex.A3is the original promissory note Rs.1,00,000/-, dated 15.06.2013 executed by defendant No.1 in favour of plaintiff.

Ex.A4is the cheque bearing No.005474, dated:20.06.2013 for Rs.2,25,000/- issued by defendant No.1 drawn on Bank of India, Karimnagar Branch.

Ex.A5is the cheque bearing No.032583, dated:20.09.2013 for Rs.2,18,000/- issued by defendant No.1 drawn on Union Bank of India, Karimnagar Branch.

Ex.A6is the cheque bearing No.032588, dated:30.09.2013 for Rs.2,00,000/- issued by defendant No.1 drawn on Union Bank of India, Karimnagar Branch.

Ex.A7is the cheque bearing No.003597, dated:16.06.2014 for Rs.3,76,000/- issued by defendant No.1 drawn on State Bank of India, Kaman Branch, Karimnagar.

Ex.A8is the original promissory note Rs.5,00,000/-, dated:20.04.2016

Page 18 of 18 ASCJ – cum – Addl.Asst.Sessions Judge, Karimnagar.

OS No.65 of 2019 (FAIR)

executed by defendant No.1 in favour of plaintiff.

Ex.A9is the Certified Copy of Cheque bearing No.047910,

dated:15.05.2017 for Rs.5 Lakhs issued by defendant No.1 drawn on

State Bank of India, Karimnagar.

Ex.A10is the Office Copy of Legal Notice, dated:18.02.2019.

Ex.A11is the Postal Receipt, dated:18.02.2019.

Ex.A12is the registered postal cover of defendant No.1.

Ex.A13is the Certified Copy of Judgment in C.C.No.101/2018 on the file of Special Judicial First Class Magistrate, Karimnagar.

FOR THE DEFENDANT:

Ex.B1is the Mee Seva Copy of Agreement of Sale-cum-General Power of Attorney vide Document No.7566/2011, dated:09.08.2011.

Ex.B2is the Mee Seva Copy of Agreement of Sale-cum-General Power of Attorney vide Document No.12001/2013, dated:18.11.2013.

Ex.B3is the Mee Seva Copy of Agreement of Sale-cum-General Power of Attorney vide Document No.10921/2015, dated:06.11.2015.

Addl. Senior Civil Judge - cum -Addl.Asst. Sessions Judge, Karimnagar.

Page 1 of 13 ASCJ – cum – Addl.Asst.Sessions Judge, Karimnagar.

OS No.179 of 2018 (FAIR)

IN THE COURT OF THE ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE – CUM –

ADDITIONAL ASSISTANT SESSIONS JUDGE AT KARIMNAGAR.

Present:Smt. K.RANI, Addl. Senior Civil Judge – cum – Addl.Asst. Sessions Judge,

K A R I M N A G A R.

WEDNESDAY, THIS THE 22nd DAY OF OCTOBER, 2025.

ORIGINAL SUIT No.179 of 2018.

Between:

1.Munigala Chandraiah S/o Hanumaiah, Age:73 Years, Occ:Agriculture R/o H.No.2-82, Bhoopalapatnam Village of Choppadandi Mandal of Karimnagar District. … Plaintiff

A N D

1.Choppadandi Sujatha W/o Late Suresh, AGe:40 Years, Occ:Household,

2.Choppadandi Saikumar S/o Late Suresh, Age:22 Years, Occ:Welding works,

3.Choppadandi Nagamani D/o Late Suresh, Age:15 Years, Minor under guardianship of her natural mother defendant No.1, All resident of H.No.1-555/3, Choppadandi Village and Mandal of Karimnagar District are the defendant No.1 to 3.

… Defendant

This suit is coming on 06.10.2025 before me at the stage of final hearing in the presence of Sri B.Satyanarayana Raju, Advocate for plaintiff and Sri M.Rajesham, Advocate for defendant and having been heard and having stood over till this day for consideration, this Court delivered the following:

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

This suit has been filed by the plaintiff for recovery of hand loan amount of Rs.3,53,400/- together with interest 2% per month (Principal amount of

Rs.2,40,000/- + interest Rs.1,13,400/-) from defendants.

Page 2 of 13 ASCJ – cum – Addl.Asst.Sessions Judge, Karimnagar.

OS No.179 of 2018 (FAIR)

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

(a).That the Choppadandi Suresh died on 09.06.2017 and the defendants No.1 to 3 have succeeded to his properties and liable for payment of his borrowed amounts to the plaintiff. The plaintiff is a toddy tapper, an agriculturist and the amount so given to late Choppadandi Suresh was his hard earned money and due to friendship for the construction of house, he gave the said amount in presence of defendant No.2, who signed as a witnesses to the borrowed amount from the plaintiff. The defendant No.1 is the wife and defendant No.2 and 3 are the son and daughter of deceased Choppadandi Suresh who is a friend of plaintiff and the deceased father of the defendants No.2 and 3 approached the plaintiff and requested to arrange sum loan amount for the purpose of construction of his house and accordingly the plaintiff arranged an amount of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees

Fifty Thousands Only) on 07.06.2016, on 08.09.2016 Rs.1,30,000/- (Rupees One

Lakhs Thirty Thousands Only) and on 08.01.2017 Rs.60,000/- (Rupees Sixty

Thousands Only) in all Rs.2,40,000/- (Rupees Two Lakhs Forty Thousands Only) along with interest 2% per month to deceased Choppadandi Suresh. On receiving the above said amounts, deceased Choppadandi Suresh executed a promissory note and the defendant No.2 has stood as surety for his deceased father

Choppadandi Suresh and two witnesses have also signed on the promissory note.

Page 3 of 13 ASCJ – cum – Addl.Asst.Sessions Judge, Karimnagar.

OS No.179 of 2018 (FAIR)

(b)That the deceased father of defendant No.2 and 3 and husband of defendant No.1 promised to repay the loan amounts along with interest @2% per month i.e. Rs.1,13,400/- (Rupees One Lakh Thirteen Thousands Four Hundred

Only). That the total principal amount of Rs.2,40,000/- and total interest of

Rs.1,13,400/- comes from the date of execution of pro-notes on different dates.

That the total amount of Rs.3,53,400/- (Principal amount of Rs.2,40,000/- +

Rs.1,13,000/-) is due from the deceased father of defendant No.2 and 3 and husband of defendant No.1.

(c)After the death of Choppadandi Suresh the plaintiff approached the defendants for repayment of borrowed amount of Rs.3,53,400/-, but the defendant No.1 and 2 under one or other pretext postponed the repayment of due amounts covered under the pro-notes executed by the deceased father of defendants. The defendants being the legal heirs of their deceased said Suresh and they have inherited all the properties belongs to him. The defendant No.1 and 2 failed to repay the due amount to the plaintiff, so the plaintiff got issued a legal notice on 19.07.2018 to the defendants by giving 15 days time, even then the defendants did not pay the due amount to the plaintiff, hence this suit is filed against the defendants for recovery of money of due amount including interest at

Rs.3,53,400/-(Rupees Three Lakhs Fifty Three Thousands Four Hundred Only).

Hence, the suit.

Page 4 of 13 ASCJ – cum – Addl.Asst.Sessions Judge, Karimnagar.

OS No.179 of 2018 (FAIR)

3.Summons were served on defendants No.1 to 3. Defendant No.1 to 3 filed

Written Statement by denying the plaint averments and further submitted that, the defendants are joint family members, during life time of the deceased, they amicably discussing each and every issue of the family, here the plaintiff alleged that during the life time of the deceased had taken the amounts is not correct hence denied. That the deceased having no property owned by him and there is no other property left over by him to be succeeded by the defendants. The plaintiff filed promissory note reflecting the alleged amount but did not attach the receipt forming part of the promissory note which clearly shows that the promissory note is fabricated and no amount is received by late Suresh under the said promissory note.

3(i)If late Suresh had taken any loan from the plaintiff, he would have informed the same to the defendants. In the cause title, the plaintiff shown his occupation as toddy tapper and agriculturist and thus he is not a money lender to believe his version that he advanced the suit amount to late Suresh or to say that he is licensed money lender, as per the plaint alleged the amounts are given on interest to the deceased, therefore, as per the Telangana Money Lenders Act the plaintiff must have license to do such a business.

3(ii)The defendants submitted that there is no cause of action for the plaintiff to file the suit against them to recover the amount alleged to be borrowed by late

Page 5 of 13 ASCJ – cum – Addl.Asst.Sessions Judge, Karimnagar.

OS No.179 of 2018 (FAIR)

Suresh under the promissory note, which is fabricated. Therefore, the defendants are not at all liable to pay the suit amount to the plaintiff. The plaintiff unnecessarily and to harass them mentally and to extract money from them filed this Suit. Hence, prayed to dismiss the suit with exemplary costs.

4.During the course of trial, plaintiff examined himself as PW1 and got marked Ex.A1 to A10. On behalf of plaintiff one Katla Sayanna examined as

PW.2. On the other hand the defendant No.2 is examined as DW.1 and defendant

No.1 examined as DW.2, but no exhibits were marked on their behalf.

5.Heard both sides and perused the material available on record, following issues are framed:

1. Whether suit pro-notes, dated:07.06.2016, 08.09.2016, 08.01.2017 are true valid and binding on the defendants?

2. Whether the plaintiff is entitled Decree for the suti amount as prayed for?

3. To what relief?

Issue No.1 and 2:

6.Plaintiff by way of pleadings, it is averted that he got acquaintance with

Late Choppadandi Suresh and during his life time said Suresh has approached him for lending amount for the purpose of construction of his house. He advanced loan to said Suresh on three occasions in the presence of witnesses, in

Page 6 of 13 ASCJ – cum – Addl.Asst.Sessions Judge, Karimnagar.

OS No.179 of 2018 (FAIR)

turn said Suresh has executed promissory note on each occasion in his favour, while his son i.e., defendant No.2 stood has surety for the loan amounts.

7.Subsequently said Suresh died on 09.06.2017 leaving behind him, defendant No.1 to defendant No.3 has his legal heirs. Later, he demanded defendant No.1 and 2 for repayment of borrowed amount along with the interest but they postponed the same on one pretext or other. Further defendants inherited all the properties belonging to said deceased Suresh and they are liable to pay due loan amount along with the interest.

8.Defendants by way of filing of written statement denied the obtained of the loan by the said Suresh and submitted that they being the members of joint family used to discuss each and every issue of the family during the life time of said Suresh but he never disclosed about obtaining of loan from the plaintiff and there is no property owned by deceased and no property is succeeded by them.

Further they have taken the defence that suit promissory notes are fabricated and no amount was received by late Suresh under the said promissory note.

9.During the trial in order to establish the claim of the plaintiff, he got examined himself as PW.1 and one of the attestor namely Katla Sayanna an attestor of the promissory notes as PW.2.

Page 7 of 13 ASCJ – cum – Addl.Asst.Sessions Judge, Karimnagar.

OS No.179 of 2018 (FAIR)

10.PW.1 filed the chief affidavit in lieu of chief examination while reiterating the averments of the plaint and got marked Ex.A1 to A3 documents to support his version. Ex.A1 is the Bond Paper executed by defendant, dated:07.09.2016,

Ex.P2 is the Office Copy of Legal Notice, dated:12.08.2018 and Ex.P3 is the

Postal Receipt, dated:12.08.2018.

11.In a nut shell plaintiff/PW.1 deposed that he got advanced the hand loan amount of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousands Only) in his house situated at

Vavilalapalli of Karimnagar to defendant on 07.09.2016, after receiving loan amount, defendant got executed simple pro-note, in his favour and one Panga

Sahadeva Reddy has scribed the pro-note. Further one Gangadi Jaganmohan

Reddy, Methuku Gopal Reddy, Battu Linga Reddy have attested said simple pro- note. PW.2 Methuku Gopal Reddy, filed chief affidavit and through his evidence, he supported the testimony of PW.1.

12.On perusal of the record, Ex.A1 to A3 promissory notes shows that one

Choppadandi Suresh has executed promissory notes infavour of one Munigala

Chandraiah (Plaintiff) on three different dates i.e., on 07.06.2016 for an amount of Rs.50,000/-, 08.09.2016 for an amount of Rs.1,30,000/-, and 08.01.2017 for an amount of Rs.60,000/- in the presence of witnesses namely Ch.Saikumar,

Page 8 of 13 ASCJ – cum – Addl.Asst.Sessions Judge, Karimnagar.

OS No.179 of 2018 (FAIR)

K.Ramaiah and K.Sayanna and they have signed on said promissory notes at witness column.

13.It is a defence of defendants that late Choppadandi Suresh being their family member never obtained any loan as alleged by the plaintiff. They have cross examined PW.1 and PW.2 but they could not brought any variation in the evidence of PW.1 and PW.2 during the cross examination in order to shake the evidence of plaintiff witnesses and to support their defence. It is a main contention of the defendants that Ex.A1 to A3 are fabricated and containing the forged signatures but it is not executed by the late Suresh. It is their contention that said late Suresh never constructed any building by obtaining the loans but it was the father of late Suresh constructed the house or building. Further they are denying the signatures appearing upon the executed column of promissory notes i.e., Ex.A1 to A3 documents.

14.In defence, defendants got examined defendant No.1 as DW.1 and defendant No.2 as DW.2. Both the witnesses has filed respective chief affidavits denying that they have succeeded the properties left behind by Late Suresh.

Further they have denied about the obtaining of loan by their family member late

Suresh and with an intention to wrongful gain, the plaintiff is trying to exploit their condition subsequent to the death of late Suresh. Further they have taken the

Page 9 of 13 ASCJ – cum – Addl.Asst.Sessions Judge, Karimnagar.

OS No.179 of 2018 (FAIR)

plea that no receipt is attached to or forming part of the promissory notes. Further they have taken the plea that plaintiff do not possess any money lending licence to do the business of money lending.

15.During the cross examination of DW.1, he admitted that they got own house at Choppadandi village and he along with his mother and sister are residing in the said house and no portion of said house is given on rent. It is stated by him that he do not know whether his father obtained amount on three occasions for renovation of their house and he also do not know that his father has executed promissory note on each date of obtaining of loan amount from the plaintiff.

16.Further he admitted that there are no corrections in Ex.A1 to

A3/promissory notes and the own house is standing on the name of his father namely Late Suresh, but it was constructed by his grand father. DW.2 being the wife of Late Suresh stated that her husband died in June, 2007 and the house bearing No.1-555/3 of Choppadandi village is standing on the name of her husband. Further she admitted that she along with Defendant No.2 and Defendant

No.3 are legal heirs of her husband. Further she admitted that she was not filed any document to show that Defendant No.2 was minor at the time of obtaining the loan by the her husband. She also stated that she so not know whether her

Page 10 of 13 ASCJ – cum – Addl.Asst.Sessions Judge, Karimnagar.

OS No.179 of 2018 (FAIR)

husband obtained loan on three occasions by executed promissory notes from the plaintiff.

17.The entire evidence lead by the defendants shows that they are not aware whether their family member late Suresh i.e., husband of D1 and father of D.2 and D3 obtained loan on three occasions from the plaintiff or not by executing promissory note on each occasion which is attested by the witnesses including defendant No.2. As per the version of plaintiff, defendant No.2 was much present at the time of obtaining of loan by late Suresh on three occasions from him and he attested that the said promissory notes. Surprisingly, the signatures of attestor were not confronted to defendant No.2 during his cross examination as DW.2.

Though defendants has taken the plea that Ex.A1 to A3 promissory notes are forged and fabricated documents but they have taken any steps for comparison of admitted signatures of late Suresh with the signatures appearing upon the promissory notes alleged to be signed by him. Further defendants has not examined any of the independent witnesses to show that late Suresh has not constructed any house or building during his life time for which he is alleged to obtain the loan from plaintiff. PW.2 being the independent witness, an attestor of the promissory notes, as categorically stated in his evidence about the execution of said promissory notes by the late Suresh during his life time and also he stated that promissory note/Ex.A1 was scribed by the said Suresh but he do not know

Page 11 of 13 ASCJ – cum – Addl.Asst.Sessions Judge, Karimnagar.

OS No.179 of 2018 (FAIR)

the scribe of Ex.A2/promissory note but he was present on three occasions, while plaintiff advancing of loan amount to the Late Suresh and singed on each promissory note as an attestor.

18.As per the evidence of plaintiff, reveals that the Late Choppadandi Suresh got house property as shown in Ex.A9 as such defendant No.1 to 3 are liable to pay the loan amount along with interest either by proceeds received from sale of estate belonging to Late Choppadandi Suresh or by themselves while withholding estate of Late Choppadandi Suresh.

19.In view of supra discussion, plaintiff by adducing oral and documentary evidence established that Late Choppadandi Suresh who is the husband of defendant No.1 and father of defendant No.2, 3 borrowed Rs.3,53,400/- (Rupees

Three Lakhs Fifty Three Thousands Four Hundred Only) together with interest @2% per month (Principal amount of Rs.2,40,000/- + interest Rs.1,13,400/-) from him and he is entitled to recover said loan amount along with interest from the estate of Late Choppadandi Suresh withhold by defendant No.1 to 3.

Therefore, this issue is answered in favour of plaintiff and against defendant No.1 to 3.

Issues No.3:

20.In view of the discussions in Issue No.1 and 2, the plaintiff is entitled for the suit amount along with the interest.

Page 12 of 13 ASCJ – cum – Addl.Asst.Sessions Judge, Karimnagar.

OS No.179 of 2018 (FAIR)

21. In the result, suit is decreed with cost as follows:

(i) The defendant No.1 to 3 are directed to pay an amount of Rs.3,53,400/- (Rupees Three Lakhs Fifty Three Thousands Four Hundred Only) together with interest on principal amount within (45) days from this day, @ 12% per annum from the date of suit till the date of decree and @ 6% per annum from the date of decree till the date of realization.

(ii) In case of failure of the defendants to pay the decreetal amount within (45) days, the plaintiff is at liberty to proceed against the estate of defendant.

Typed to my dictation directly on Computer, corrected and pronounced by me, in the open court on this the 22 nd day of October, 2025.

Addl. Senior Civil Judge - cum -Addl.Asst. Sessions Judge, Karimnagar.

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

WITNESS EXAMINED

FOR THE PLAINTIFF:FOR THE DEFENDANT:

PW.1Munigala ChandraiahDW.1Choppadandi Saikumar

PW.2Katla SayannaDW.2Choppadandi Sujatha

EXHIBITS MARKED

FOR THE PLAINTIFF:

Ex.A1is the Original Demand Promissory Note executed by Choppadandi Suresh for Rs.50,000/-, dated:07.06.2016.

Ex.A2is the Original Demand Promissory Note executed by Choppadandi Suresh for Rs.1,30,000/-, dated:08.09.2016.

Page 13 of 13 ASCJ – cum – Addl.Asst.Sessions Judge, Karimnagar.

OS No.179 of 2018 (FAIR)

Ex.A3is the Original Demand Promissory Note executed by Choppadandi Suresh for Rs.60,000/-, dated:08.01.2017.

Ex.A4is the Office copy of Legal notice issued by the plaintiff to the defendants, dated:19.07.2018.

Ex.A5is the Acknowledgment cards of legal notice pertaining to defendant No.1, dated:21.07.2018.

Ex.A6is the Acknowledgment cards of legal notice pertaining to defendant No.2, dated:21.07.2018.

Ex.A7is the Acknowledgment cards of legal notice pertaining to defendant No.3, dated:21.07.2018.

Ex.A8is the property tax payment receipt pertaining to the house standing in the name of Late Choppadandi Suresh, dated:07.12.2021.

Ex.A9is the Revision Register copy pertaining to the house standing in the name of Late Choppadandi Suresh.

FOR THE DEFENDANT: -NIL-

Addl. Senior Civil Judge - cum -Addl.Asst. Sessions Judge, Karimnagar.

1 ASCJ-CUM-ADDL.ASJ, KARIMNAGAR.

SC.No.38 of 2023 (FAIR)

IN THE COURT OF THE ADDITIONAL ASSISTANT SESSIONS JUDGE

AT :: KARIMNAGAR

Present: SMT. K.RANI,

Addl. Assistant Sessions Judge,

Karimnagar.

Monday, the 29th day of September, 2025.

SESSIONS CASE NO. 38 OF 2023

(On committal made by Smt. Shereena Mohd, learned Judicial

Magistrate of First Class-cum-Prl.Junior Civil Judge, Karimnagar

FAC:Spl.Judicial Magistrate of F.C.(Excise), Karimnagar, vide PRC No.06/2022 dated 22.05.2023) Name of the Complainant::Sub-Inspector of Police, Police Station LMD Colony, (Crime No.96/2021 of P.S., LMD Colony.)

Name of the Accused::Accused No.1 -Thoutam SanthoshKumar S/o Parthasaradi, Age:30 Years, Caste:Padmashali R/o Nusthulapur Village of Thimmapur Mandal. Accused No.2 - Md.Mohsin Ali S/o Yunus Ali, Age:35 Years, Caste:Muslim R/o Sawaran Street, Karimnagar. Accused No.3 - Md. Abdul Wasim S/o Samad, Age:37 Years,Caste:Muslim R/o H.No.19-02-76/1/A, 1st floorbuildingJahanuma, Hyderabad. (Case against accused No.3 is split-up as he is absconding and NBW issued against him) Charge::U/Secs. 306, 342 R/w 34 of Indian Penal Code.

2 ASCJ-CUM-ADDL.ASJ, KARIMNAGAR.

SC.No.38 of 2023 (FAIR)

Plea of the Accused::Not Guilty.

Finding of the Court::Not Guilty.

Sentence or Order::The accused No.1 and 2 are found not guilty for the offence under Sections 306, 342 r/w 34 of Indian Penal Code and accordingly they are acquitted for the said offence under Section 235 (1) Cr.P.C. The bail bonds of accused persons shall remain in force for a period of six months as contemplated under Section 437-A Cr.P.C. Unmarked case property i.e., one cell phone the words J-10 written on it, one cell phone black colour with the words CELLECOR written on it and one cell phone white colour with the words Q-Tel-U written on it depositedbeforelearned

Judicial Magistrate of First

Class (Excise) at Karimnagar is directed to be returned to the claimant.

Prosecution conducted by::Sri G.Laxman,

Additional Public Prosecutor.

Accused defended by::Sri E.Madhusudhan Rao and Sri K.Harish Kumar, Counsels

for Accused No.1 and

SriV.Raghuramanand SriD.DamodherReddy, Counsels for Accused No.2.

This case is coming before me for final hearing in the presence of Sri G.Laxman, Additional Public Prosecutor for the State, Sri E.Madhusudhan Rao and Sri K.Harish Kumar, Counsels for Accused No.1 and Sri V.Raghuraman and Sri D.Damodher Reddy, Counsels for Accused 3 ASCJ-CUM-ADDL.ASJ, KARIMNAGAR.

SC.No.38 of 2023 (FAIR)

No.2 and upon perusing the material papers on record, having heard and having stood over for consideration till this day, the Court delivered the following:

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

1. The Sub-Inspector of Police, LMD Colony, Police Station, filed charge sheet against accused No.1 and 2 for the offence punishable under

Sections 306, 342 R/w 34 of Indian Penal Code (in short ‘The IPC’) in

Crime No.96/2021 of P.S., LMD Colony, Karimnagar District.

2.The facts of the case in brief as per the charge sheet is that on 14.05.2021 at 09.30 hours the complainant/Bongoni Rajeshwari came to

Police Station, lodged a complaint stating that her younger son/Bongoni

Sanjeev has been attending to labour works under Md.Shoheb for cutting of trees and wood. In the night of 12.05.2021 her son Bongoni Sanjeev and 1)Thoutam Santhosh 2)Md Mosin and 3)Abdul Vaasim who are the friends and workers of Md.Shoheb were arranged a liquor party in the rented room of Md.Shoheb at Indiranagar Village. She further came to know that in the party Thoutam Santhosh, Md.Mosin and Abdul Vaasim beat her son/Sanjeev, after completion of party, her son slept in the same room till the evening on 13.05.2021, observing her son by Md.Shoheb tried to wake up, but her son did not wake up and he was unconscious 4 ASCJ-CUM-ADDL.ASJ, KARIMNAGAR.

SC.No.38 of 2023 (FAIR)

state, upon which Shoheb informed the same to her elder son/Laxman over

Telephone, on that they went to the spot and shifted her son Sanjeev to

Government Headquarters Hospital, Karimnagar for treatment, while undergoing treatment on 15.05.2021 at 01.00 hours, her son died. She suspected on Thoutam Santhosh, Md.Mosin and Abdul Vaasim in the death of her son. Hence, she requested to take necessary action.

(a).On that complaint, the Sub Inspector of Police/LW.14 has registered a case in Crime No.96 of 2021 under Sec.174 of Cr.PC (Suspicious) and took up the investigation. During the course of investigation, LW.14 examined and recorded the statements of witnesses, went to the

Government Headquarters Hospital, Karimnagar, found the dead body of deceased in the mortuary room, got photographed the corpse with the help of photographer, conducted inquest over the dead body of deceased, subjected the corpse for autopsy. Accordingly the Medical

Officer/Dr.B.Shubhagini, Civil Assistant Surgeon, Government Hospital,

Karimnagar has conducted autopsy over the dead body of deceased.

Medical Officer/LW.13 preserved the viscera and heart of the deceased for chemical analysis and examinations and reports. Later LW.14 visited the scene of offence at Indiranagar Village and observed the scene, incorporated the same in Crime Details Form. LW.14 collected details 5 ASCJ-CUM-ADDL.ASJ, KARIMNAGAR.

SC.No.38 of 2023 (FAIR)

Postmortem Examination Report from the Medical officer, in which the

Medical Officer reserved his opinion by preserving viscera and heart of the deceased. Accordingly LW.14 forwarded viscera and heart to Regional

Forensic Science Laboratory, Karimnagar and KMC, Warangal for chemical analysis and examination and issue reports.

(b)Accordingly the Regional Forensic Science Laboratory authority and analyzed viscera of the deceased and issued report, as well as the

Professor and Head Department of Pathology, KMC Warangal examined preserved heart of deceased and issued report. On the basis of the above reports, the Medical Officer/LW.13 has issued final opinion stating that the cause of death of deceased is "Metabolic Encephalopathy".

(c)During the course of investigation, on 21.10.2021 at 10.30 hours, the

LW.6/Padala Rajkumar came to Police Station and lodged a complaint stating that his aunt/Bongoni Rajeshwari has two sons elder son Laxman and younger son Sanjeev. Previously Nusthulapur Villager/accused

Thoutam Santhosh and Santhosh's friends Vaseem, Mousin beat his brother-in-law/Sanjeev on the allegations of commit theft a cell phone, further they kept him in a room, while he was searching for Sanjeev, he met his brother-in-law Sanjeev, where Sanjeev told entire facts that the 6 ASCJ-CUM-ADDL.ASJ, KARIMNAGAR.

SC.No.38 of 2023 (FAIR)

above three persons beat him indiscriminately by insulting him over the allegations of commit theft of a cell phone, where they arranged a liquor party, in the night and all of them in drunken condition. Thoutam Santhosh told him that they would not leave his brother-in-law without hand over their cell phone, on that he returned to his house. Thereafter his brother-in- law died in the Hospital. At that time his elder brother-in-law/Laxman asked the above three persons in his presence about the death of Sanjeev, on that they promised to pay compensation amount for the death of his younger brother-in-law/Sanjeev, due to which they did not reveal the facts to Police.

(d)After completion of four days of Dassura festival, he, his elder brother-in-law Laxman and his brother Parsharamulu went to went to the house of Santhosh at Nusthulapur Village and asked compensation amount, on that he made phone conference to Shoheb, Mosin and Wasim, in the open speaker of the phone conference all of them threatened and insulted to his elder brother-in-law Laxman about the compensation amount further they abetted him to commit suicide as their life was waste, on that he took his brother-in-law to his house and try to convince his brother-in-law over the insult of the above four persons, due to 7 ASCJ-CUM-ADDL.ASJ, KARIMNAGAR.

SC.No.38 of 2023 (FAIR)

abetment to commit suicide by the above person, his brother-in-law felt insult and got mental agony and committed suicide by hanging and died.

As such he has informed the facts to the family members of deceased and also brought the same facts to the notice of Police to take necessary action.

(e)On receipt of the above petition, LW.14 Sub Inspector of Police altered the section of law from U/Sec.174 Cr.PC to U/Sec.306 R/w 34 of

IPC and submitted the alteration memos to all the concerned. Later re- recorded the statements of witnesses. On 10.11.2021 at Indiranagar stage apprehended the accused No.1 and 2 and Md. Shoheb Ahmed (who involved in Crime No.246/2021 U/Sec.306 R/w 34 of IPC of LMD PS), interrogated them, they confessed their guilty. LW.14 recorded the confession statements of accused No.1 and 2, recovered their cell phones under cover confession and recovery panchanama, brought them to Police

Station, arrested them and sent them to judicial custody. LW.14 made efforts to arrest accused No.3 but could not apprehended since he has no permanent residence. After completion of investigation filed charge sheet against accused No.1 to 3 for the offence under Section 306, 342 R/w 34 of IPC with a request to issue NBW against accused No.3.

8 ASCJ-CUM-ADDL.ASJ, KARIMNAGAR.

SC.No.38 of 2023 (FAIR)

3.The learned Prl.Judicial Magistrate of First Class

FAC:Spl.Judl.Magistrate of First Class (Excise), Karimnagar, took cognizance of the offence under Section 306 R/w 34 of IPC against the accused No.1 to 3 and supplied copies of documents as required under

Section 207 Cr.P.C., to accused No.1, 2 and accused No.3 is absconding.

By order dated 22.11.2023, the learned Prl.Judicial Magistrate of First

Class FAC:Spl.Judl.Magistrate of First Class (Excise), Karimnagar, committed the case to the Hon’ble Court of Prl. Sessions, Karimnagar since the alleged offence under sections 306 IPC is exclusively triable by the Hon’ble Court of Sessions. In turn, the Hon’ble Court of Sessions,

Karimnagar made over the case to this Court for disposal according to law.

4.On appearance of accused before this Court and on hearing the learned Additional Public Prosecutor and the defence counsel, this Court framed charges for the offence under Section 306 of IPC against the accused, contents of the charges was read over and explained to them in

Telugu, for which they pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.

5.During the course of trial, prosecution examined PW’s. 1 to 3, out of 14 listed witnesses and got marked Exs. P1 to P7. The evidence of the 9 ASCJ-CUM-ADDL.ASJ, KARIMNAGAR.

SC.No.38 of 2023 (FAIR)

remaining witness was given up by the learned Additional Public

Prosecutor.

6.After closure of the prosecution evidence, the accused No.1 and 2 were examined under Section 313 Cr.P.C., and the incriminating circumstance appearing in the evidence of prosecution witnesses are explained to them in Telugu, for which they denied the same. The accused

No.1 and 2 did not choose to adduce any evidence on his behalf.

7.Heard the arguments of the learned Additional Public Prosecutor and the learned defence counsel and perused the material on record.

8.Now the point for determination is

Whether the prosecution proved the charge under Section 306 R/w 34 of IPC against the accused No.1 and 2, beyond reasonable doubt?

POINT:

9.It is the case of the prosecution that the accused persons has beat deceased/Bongoni Sanjeev on the allegation of committing theft of cell phone belonging to A1 and some net cash belonging to A3, subsequently while accused persons along with deceased namely Bongoni Sanjay were consuming the liquor in the rented room belonging to one Soheb Ahmed at 10 ASCJ-CUM-ADDL.ASJ, KARIMNAGAR.

SC.No.38 of 2023 (FAIR)

Indiranagar, Karimnagar, has abetted deceased to die, thereafter accused persons left the room, deceased being mentally upset and consumed over dose of liquor and become unconscious. During the treatment, the deceased died, thereby accused persons committed the alleged offence u/s.

306, 342 r/w 34 IPC.

10.Prosecution to establish its case has examined PW.1 to PW.3.

PW.1/Bongoni Rajeshwari and PW2/Bongoni Komuraiah being the parents of deceased has not stated anything against the accused persons with regard to alleged incident.

11.PW.3/S.Promod Reddy, SI of police and the investigating officer has deposed about the receipt of report from PW.1, he registered the case against the accused persons and recorded the statement of witnesses as the part of investigation. Later, he visited Government Hospital, Karimnagar and conducted inquest panchanama of the deceased namely Bongoni

Sanjeev in the presence of LW.7 and LW.8 and also recorded the statements of LW.2 to LW.4.

12.On the same day he gave a requisition to LW.13/Dr.Subhagini for conduct of Postmortem over the dead body of the deceased. Thereafter he 11 ASCJ-CUM-ADDL.ASJ, KARIMNAGAR.

SC.No.38 of 2023 (FAIR)

visited scene of offence Subhashnagar and recorded the statements of

LW.5 and LW.6 and conducted scene of offence panchanama while drafting Crime Details Form in the presence of LW.9 and LW.10.

13.The samples collected during the postmortem of the deceased, he send the said samples to RFSL, Karimnagar and received report. During the course of investigation, it came to light that Accused No.1 and

Accused No.2 has instigated deceased to commit the suicide due to which deceased consumed excess alcohol and become unconscious. He issued section alteration memo from Sec.174 Cr.P.C to Sec.306 r/w 34 IPC, then he re recorded the statements of LW.1 and LW.2.

14.On 10.11.2021, on receipt of reliable information, he along with went to Indiranagar stage and apprehended Accused No.1 and Accused

No.2 and recorded the confession panchanama and recovered cell phone from their possession while conducting confession-cum-recovery panchanama. After receiving Postmortem Examination Report and conclusion of investigation, he filed charge sheet against Accused No.1 to 3.

15.It is the fore most case of prosecution that accused persons has beat deceased namely Bongoni Sanjay prior to alleged incident, on the 12 ASCJ-CUM-ADDL.ASJ, KARIMNAGAR.

SC.No.38 of 2023 (FAIR)

allegation of committing theft of cell phone of Accused No.1 and some net cash of Accused No.3, subsequently while accused persons along with deceased were consuming the liquor in the rented room belonging to one

Soheb Ahmed at Indiranagar, Karimnagar, they abetted deceased to die, thereafter accused persons left the room, due to which deceased felt mental agony and consumed high dose of liquor and slept in the said room, on the next day said Soheb Ahmed found the deceased in unconscious state and informed to his family members about his condition, subsequently deceased was shifted to Govt.Hospital, Karimnagar for treatment and while undergoing treatment, he died on14.05.2021 and thereby accused persons committed the offences alleged against them.

16.PW1 and PW.2 being the parents of the deceased has not stated anything the about the alleged incident and also against accused persons.

Learned Addl.Public Prosecutor has given up remaining cited witnesses since the parents of the deceased the has not supported the case of the prosecution. PW.3 being the investigating officer has supported the version of the prosecution story.

17.It appears from the evidence of Pws.1 and 2 that they being family members of deceased might have compromised with Accused out side the 13 ASCJ-CUM-ADDL.ASJ, KARIMNAGAR.

SC.No.38 of 2023 (FAIR)

court and may not be interested to proceed into case, as such they have not stated anything against the Accused persons and also the details of alleged incident. The evidence of investigating officer is available on record, but he is the interested witness, to bring the guilt home. This court is of consider view that based on the evidence of interested witness without corroboration of independent witnesses, the accused person cannot be convicted.

18.Therefore, this court holds that the prosecution miserably failed to establish the guilt of the accused person for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 306, 342 r/w 34 IPC beyond reasonable doubt, as such the accused persons are entitled for benefit of doubt and for acquittal. The point is answered accordingly.

19. In the result, the accused No.1 and 2 are found not guilty for the offence under Sections 306, 342 r/w 34 of Indian Penal Code and accordingly they are acquitted for the said offence under Section 235 (1)

Cr.P.C. The bail bonds of accused persons shall remain in force for a period of six months as contemplated under Section 437-A Cr.P.C.

Unmarked case property i.e., one cell phone the words J-10 written on it, one cell phone black colour with the words CELLECOR written on it and 14 ASCJ-CUM-ADDL.ASJ, KARIMNAGAR.

SC.No.38 of 2023 (FAIR)

one cell phone white colour with the words Q-Tel-U written on it deposited before Judicial Magistrate of First Class (Excise) at Karimnagar is directed to be returned to the claimant.

Typed to my dictation by Stenographer directly on Computer, corrected and

pronounced by me in the open Court on this the 29th day of September, 2025.

Addl. Assistant Sessions Judge, Karimnagar.

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

WITNESSES EXAMINED

FOR THE PROSECUTION: FOR THE DEFENCE

P.W.1 Bongoni Rajeshwari ---None--- P.W.2 Bongoni Komuraiah P.W.3 S.Pramod Reddy

EXHIBITS MARKED

FOR PROSECUTION:

Ex.P1is the 161 Cr.PC statement of PW.1. Ex.P2is the 161 Cr.PC statement of PW.2. Ex.P3is the First Information Report. Ex.P4is the Inquest Panchanama dated:14.05.2021. Ex.P5is the Crime Details Form. Ex.P6is the Postmortem Examination Report. Ex.P7is the Forensic Science Laboratory Report.

FOR DEFENCE: -NIL-

Material Objects

-NIL-.

Addl. Assistant Sessions Judge, Karimnagar.

1 ASCJ-CUM-ADDL.ASJ, KARIMNAGAR.

SC.No.39 of 2023 (FAIR)

IN THE COURT OF THE ADDITIONAL ASSISTANT SESSIONS JUDGE

AT :: KARIMNAGAR

Present: SMT. K.RANI, Addl. Assistant Sessions Judge, Karimnagar.

Monday, the 29th day of September, 2025.

SESSIONS CASE NO. 39 OF 2023

(On committal made by Smt. Shereena Mohd, learned Judicial Magistrate of

First Class-cum-Prl.Junior Civil Judge, Karimnagar FAC:Spl.Judicial Magistrate

of F.C.(Excise), Karimnagar, vide PRC No.07/2022 dated 22.05.2023) Name of the Complainant::Sub-Inspector of Police, Police Station LMD Colony, (Crime No.246/2021 of P.S., LMD Colony.)

Name of the Accused::Accused No.1 - Thoutam Santhosh Kumar S/o Parthasaradi, Age:30 Years,Caste:Padmashali R/o Nusthulapur Village of Thimmapur Mandal. Accused No.2 -Mohammad Shoheb Ahmed S/o Shakeel Ahmed,Age:27Years, Caste:Muslim R/o Srinagar Colony, Karimnagar. Accused No.3 -Md.Mohsin Ali S/o Yunus Ali, Age:35 Years, Caste:Muslim R/o Sawaran Street, Karimnagar. Accused No.4 - Md. Abdul Wasim S/o Samad, Age:37 Years, Caste:Muslim R/o H.No.19-02-76/1/A, 1st floor building Jahanuma, Hyderabad. (Case against accused No.3 is split-up as he is absconding and NBW issued against him) 2 ASCJ-CUM-ADDL.ASJ, KARIMNAGAR.

SC.No.39 of 2023 (FAIR)

Charge::U/Secs. 306, 342 R/w 34 of Indian Penal Code. Plea of the Accused::Not Guilty. Finding of the Court::Not Guilty.

Sentence or Order::The accused No.1 to 3 are found not guilty for the offence under Sections 306, 342 r/w 34 of Indian Penal Code and accordingly they are acquitted for the said offence under Section 235 (1) Cr.P.C. The bail bonds of accused persons shall remain in force for a period of six months as contemplated under Section 437-A Cr.P.C. Unmarked case property i.e., blue colour cut lungi deposited before learned

Judicial Magistrate of First Class

(Excise) at Karimnagar is directed to be destroy after expiry of appeal. Prosecution conducted by::Sri G.Laxman,

Additional Public Prosecutor.

Accused defended by::Sri E.Madhusudhan Rao and Sri K.Harish Kumar, Counsels for AccusedNo.1,2and SriV.Raghuramanand Sri D.Damodher Reddy, Counsels

for Accused No.3.

This case is coming before me for final hearing in the presence of Sri G.Laxman, Additional Public Prosecutor for the State, Sri E.Madhusudhan Rao and Sri K.Harish Kumar, Counsels for Accused No.1, 2 and Sri V.Raghuraman and Sri D.Damodher Reddy, Counsels for Accused No.3 and upon perusing the material papers on record, having heard and having stood over for consideration till this day, the Court delivered the following:

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

1.TheSub-Inspector of Police, LMD Colony, Police Station, filed charge sheet against accused No.1 to 3 for the offence punishable under Sections 306, 3 ASCJ-CUM-ADDL.ASJ, KARIMNAGAR.

SC.No.39 of 2023 (FAIR)

342 R/w 34 of Indian Penal Code (in short ‘The IPC’) in Crime No.246/2021 of

P.S., LMD Colony, Karimnagar District.

2.The facts of the case in brief as per the charge sheet is that on 30.10.2021 at 7.30 hours, the complainant Bongoni Rekha came to Police Station and lodged a report stating that her husband/Bongoni Laxman living by driving an auto. Her brother-in-law Bongoni Sanjay had died, at that time a criminal case registered against persons, since the death of her brother-in-law, her husband has been suffering mentally economically. Thoutam Santhosh, Sohel, Mosin and Abdul

Wasim threatened her husband stating that they have killed her brother-in-law/Sanjeev and they would kill her husband also, on that her husband informed the same to her brother-in-law/Theegala Kumar. On 19.10.2021 at 22.30 hours, after completion of dinner, she went to her parent's home in the same

Village to sleep and her husband slept in their house, on the next day morning i.e., on 20.10.2021 at about 06.30 hours, she came to their house and found the doors of their house closed, upon she called her husband, but no response from inside of their house, upon which she called neighbours and opened the doors and found her husband's dead body by hanging from the ceiling fan. She further stated that her husband committed suicide due to threatening and mental suffering of said four persons. Hence, she requested for take necessary action on Thoutam Santhosh, 4 ASCJ-CUM-ADDL.ASJ, KARIMNAGAR.

SC.No.39 of 2023 (FAIR)

Shohel, Mosin and Abdul Wasim who were responsible for the death of her husband.

(a).On receipt of complaint, the Assistant Sub Inspector of Police/LW.15 has registered a case in Crime No.246 of 2021 under Sec.306 R/w 34 of Cr.PC and took up the investigation. During the course of investigation, LW.15 examined and recorded the statements of witnesses, visited the scene of offence i.e. at the residence of the deceased Subhashnagar H/o R.K Colony Village and observed the dead body of deceased and found a ligature mark as U shape on the neck of the deceased, no external injuries found on the dead body of deceased. LW.15 Asst.

Sub Inspector of Police seized a lungi which was used for hanging by the deceased under cover of Crime Details Form. Later conducted inquest over the dead body of deceased , forwarded the corpse for autopsy to Government

Headquarters Hospital, Karimnagar. Accordingly the Duty Medical

Officer/Dr.N.Laxmikantha Reddy, Civil Assistant Surgeon, Government

Headquarters Hospital, Karimnagar has conducted autopsy over the dead body of deceased. The dead body of deceased handed over to the complainant for cremation.

(b)Later LW.16/Sub Inspector of Police in the presence of LW7/Padala Raj

Kumar examined and recorded his statement. During his examination LW.7 stated 5 ASCJ-CUM-ADDL.ASJ, KARIMNAGAR.

SC.No.39 of 2023 (FAIR)

that previously Nusthulapur Village Thoutam Santhosh Kumar and Santhosh's friends Wasim, Mousin beat his younger brother-in-law Sanjeev, where Sanjeev on the allegations of commit theft a cell phone, further they kept him in a room, while he was searching for Sanjeev, he met his brother-in-law Sanjeev, where

Sanjeev told entire facts that the above three persons beat him indiscriminately by insulting him over the allegations of commit theft of a cell phone, where they arranged a liquor party in the night and all of them in drunken condition. Thoutam

Santhosh told him that they would not leave his brother-in-law without hand over their cell phone, on that he returned to his house. Thereafter his brother-in-law died in the Hospital. At that time his elder brother-in-law/Laxman (deceased) asked the above three persons in his presence about the death of Sanjeev, on that they promised to pay compensation amount for the death of his younger brother- in-law/Sanjeev, due to which they did not reveal the facts. After completion of four days of Dassura festival, he and his elders brother-in-law Laxman/deceased and his brother Parsharamulu went to the house of Santhosh at Nusthulapur

Village and asked compensation amount, on that he made phone conference to

Shoheb, Mosin and Wasim, in the open speaker of the phone conference all of them threatened and insulted to his elder brother-in-law Laxman about the compensation amount, further they abetted him to commit suicide as their life was waste, on that he taken his brother-in-law to his house and try to convince his 6 ASCJ-CUM-ADDL.ASJ, KARIMNAGAR.

SC.No.39 of 2023 (FAIR)

brother-in-law over the insult of the above four persons, due to abetment to commit suicide by the said persons, his brother-in-law felt insult and got mental agony and committed suicide by hanging and died.

(c)Later LW.16 Sub Inspector of Police examined and recorded the statements of witnesses, visited the scene of offence i.e. house of accused No.1 at

Nusthulapur Village, where the accused No.1 and 2 to 4 abused and abetted the deceaed/ Laxman, later oberved the scene of offence and incorporated the observation in Crime Details Form.

(d)On 10.11.2021 LW.16 rushed to Indiranagar stage and apprehended the accused No.1 to 3, interrogated them, during the interrogation accused No.1 to 3 confessed to have committed this offence.

(e)LW.14 recorded the confession statements of accused No.1 and 2, recovered their cell phones under cover confession and recovery panchanama, brought them to Police Station, arrested them and sent them to judicial custody.

After completion of investigation filed charge sheet against accused for the offence under Section 306 R/w 34 of IPC.

3.The learned Prl.Judicial Magistrate of First Class FAC:Spl.Judl.Magistrate of First Class (Excise), Karimnagar, took cognizance of the offence under Section 7 ASCJ-CUM-ADDL.ASJ, KARIMNAGAR.

SC.No.39 of 2023 (FAIR)

306 R/w 34 of IPC against the accused No.1 to 4 and supplied copies of documents as required under Section 207 Cr.P.C., to accused No.1 to 3 and accused No.4 is absconding. By order dated 22.05.2023, the learned Prl.Judicial

Magistrate of First Class FAC:Spl.Judl.Magistrate of First Class (Excise),

Karimnagar, committed the case to the Hon’ble Court of Prl. Sessions,

Karimnagar since the alleged offence under sections 306 IPC is exclusively triable by the Hon’ble Court of Sessions. In turn, the Hon’ble Court of Sessions,

Karimnagar made over the case to this Court for disposal according to law.

4. On appearance of accused No.1 to 3 before this Court and on hearing the learned Additional Public Prosecutor and the defence counsel, this Court framed charges for the offence under Section 306 R/w 34 of IPC against the accused No.1 to 3, contents of the charges was read over and explained to them in Telugu, for which they pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.

5.During the course of trial, prosecution examined PW’s. 1 to 4, out of 16 listed witnesses and got marked Exs. P1 to P8. The evidence of the remaining witness was given up by the learned Additional Public Prosecutor.

6. After closure of the prosecution evidence, the accused No.1 to 3 were examined under Section 313 Cr.P.C., and the incriminating circumstance 8 ASCJ-CUM-ADDL.ASJ, KARIMNAGAR.

SC.No.39 of 2023 (FAIR)

appearing in the evidence of prosecution witnesses are explained to them in

Telugu, for which they denied the same. The accused No.1 to 3 did not choose to adduce any evidence on their behalf.

7.Heard the arguments of the learned Additional Public Prosecutor and the learned defence counsel and perused the material on record.

8.Now the point for determination is

Whether the prosecution proved the charge under Section 306 R/w 34 of

IPC against the accused No.1 to 3, beyond reasonable doubt?

POINT:

9.It is the case of the prosecution that the accused persons have abused and insulted deceased namely Bongoni Laxman when he asked about the compensation amount on the death of his brother namely Bongoni Sanjeev.

Deceased being mentally upset and committed suicide by hanging himself to the ceiling fan at his house and thereby accused persons committed the alleged offence u/s. 306 r/w 34 IPC.

10.Prosecution to establish its case has examined PW.1 to PW.4.

PW.1/Bongoni Rekha, wife of deceased and PW2/Bongoni Komuraiah and

PW.3 /Bongoni Rajeshwari being the parents of deceased, has not stated anything against accused persons with regard to alleged incident.

9 ASCJ-CUM-ADDL.ASJ, KARIMNAGAR.

SC.No.39 of 2023 (FAIR)

11.PW.4/S.Promod Reddy, Sub Inspector of police and the investigating officer has deposed about the receipt of report from PW.1 by LW.15/

M.Venkateshwarlu, Assistant Sub Inspector of Police has registered the case against the accused persons and LW.15 recording of statement of witnesses as the part of investigation and visited scene of offence i.e., residence of the deceased at

Subhashnagar, and conducted inquest panchanama over the dead body of deceased in the presence of LW.8 and LW.9 and also conducted scene of offence panchanama in the presence of LW.10 and LW.11 and recorded the statements of

LW.2 to LW.6.

12.On 21.10.2021, he received CD file from LW.15 and re recorded the statements of LW.1 to LW.3 and LW.7. On the same day he gave a requisition to

LW.13, LW.14/Dr.N.Laxmikanth Reddy for conduct of Postmortem over the dead body of the deceased.

13.The samples collected during the postmortem of the deceased, he send the said samples to RFSL, Karimnagar and received report.

14.On 10.11.2021, on receipt of reliable information, he along with went to

Indiranagar stage and apprehended Accused No.1 to Accused No.3 and recorded the confession panchanama and recovered cell phone from their possession while 10 ASCJ-CUM-ADDL.ASJ, KARIMNAGAR.

SC.No.39 of 2023 (FAIR)

conducting confession-cum-recovery panchanama. After receiving Postmortem

Examination Report and conclusion of investigation he filed charge sheet against

Accused No.1 to 3.

15.It is the fore most case of prosecution that accused persons in has abused and insulted deceased namely Bongoni Laxman prior to alleged incident, on being ask for compensation amount for the death of his brother namely Bongoni Sanjay, due to which deceased felt mental agony and hang himself to the ceiling fan at his house situated at Indiranagar, Karimnagar and thereby accused persons committed the offences alleged against them.

16.PW1, being wife of deceased and PW.2, PW.3 being the parents of the deceased has not stated anything the about the alleged incident and also against accused persons. Learned Addl.Public Prosecutor has given up remaining cited witnesses since wife and parents of the deceased has not supported the case of the prosecution. PW.4 being the investigating officer has supported the version of the prosecution story.

17.It appears from the evidence of Pws.1 to 3 that they being family members of deceased might have compromised with Accused out side the court and may not be interested to proceed into case, as such they have not stated anything 11 ASCJ-CUM-ADDL.ASJ, KARIMNAGAR.

SC.No.39 of 2023 (FAIR)

against the Accused person and also the details of alleged incident. The evidence of investigating officer is available on record, but he being interested witness, to bring the guilt home. This court is of consider view that based on the evidence of interested witness without corroboration of independent witnesses, the accused persons cannot be convicted.

18.Therefore, this court holds that the prosecution failed to establish the guilt of the accused persons for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 306 r/w 34 IPC beyond reasonable doubt, as such the accused persons are entitled for benefit of doubt and for acquittal. The point is answered accordingly.

19.In the result, the accused No.1 to 3 are found not guilty for the offence under Sections 306 r/w 34 of Indian Penal Code and accordingly they are acquitted for the said offence under Section 235 (1) Cr.P.C. The bail bonds of accused persons shall remain in force for a period of six months as contemplated under Section 437-A Cr.P.C. Unmarked case property i.e., blue colour cut lungi deposited before learned Judicial Magistrate of First Class (Excise) at Karimnagar is directed to be destroy after expiry of appeal.

Typed to my dictation by Stenographer directly on Computer, corrected and pronounced by me in the open Court on this the 29th day of September, 2025.

Addl. Assistant Sessions Judge, Karimnagar.

12 ASCJ-CUM-ADDL.ASJ, KARIMNAGAR.

SC.No.39 of 2023 (FAIR)

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

WITNESSES EXAMINED

FOR THE PROSECUTION: FOR THE DEFENCE

P.W.1 Bongoni Rekha ---None--- P.W.2 Bongoni Komuraiah P.W.3 Bongoni Rajeshwari P.W.4 S.Pramod Reddy

EXHIBITS MARKED

FOR PROSECUTION:

Ex.P1is the signature of PW.1 on report dated:20.10.2021. Ex.P2is the 161 Cr.PC statement of PW.1. Ex.P3is the 161 Cr.PC statement of PW.2. Ex.P4is the 161 Cr.PC statement of PW.3. Ex.P5is the First Information Report. Ex.P6is the Inquest Panchanama dated:14.05.2021. Ex.P7is the Crime Details Form. Ex.P8is the Postmortem Examination Report.

FOR DEFENCE: -NIL-

Material Objects

-NIL-.

Addl. Assistant Sessions Judge, Karimnagar.

Page 1 ASCJ – cum – Addl.Asst.Sessions Judge, Karimnagar.

OS No.694 of 2025 (FAIR)

IN THE COURT OF THE ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE – CUM –

ADDITIONAL ASSISTANT SESSIONS JUDGE AT KARIMNAGAR.

Present:Smt. K.RANI, Addl. Senior Civil Judge – cum – Addl.Asst. Sessions Judge,

K A R I M N A G A R.

THURSDAY, THIS THE 9th DAY OF OCTOBER, 2025.

ORIGINAL SUIT No.694 of 2025

Between: Koduri Mahendar S/o Late Chandraiah, Age:48 Years, Occ:Business R/o H.No.9-1-185, Bhagathnagar locality of Karimnagar town and city. … Plaintiff A N D Takshasila Educational Society, Karimnagar represented by its President: Sri Muddasani Ramesh Reddy S/o Late Laxma Reddy, Age:53 Years, R/o H.No.7-2-508, Mankammathota, Karimnagar. … Defendant This suit is coming on 26.09.2025 before me at the stage of final hearing in the presence of Sri K.Gopala Krishna, Advocate for plaintiff and defendant remained ex-parte and having been heard and having stood over till this day for consideration, this Court delivered the following:

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

This suit has been filed by the plaintiff for eviction of defendant from the suit premises on the ground of default of rents and for personal use of suit premises and for recovery of arrears of rent of Rs.13,00,624-00 paisa from 15.05.2023 to 30.11.2024 at the rate of Rs.70,304-00 paisa for (18 1/2) months and simple interest @36% per annum, which comes to Rs.3,41,851-00 paisa from 05.06.2023 to 05.12.2024 from defendant.

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

a).The plaintiff submit that, the defendant is the tenant of plaintiff. The

Page 2 ASCJ – cum – Addl.Asst.Sessions Judge, Karimnagar.

OS No.694 of 2025 (FAIR)

plaintiff is the owner of the R.C.C. House at first and second floor, bearing No.7- 2-77 and 7-2-77/1 and 7-2-74 (Back Room) and 7-2-75 admeasuring an area of 388.88 square yards or 326.66 Square meters (First floor plinth area 1750 Square feet, second floor plinth area 1750 Square feet, total plinth area 3500 Square feet, situated at Mankammathota locality of Karimnagar town under the jurisdiction of

Sub District and District Registration, Karimnagar, (herein after referred as 'suit schedule property') with boundaries East:Venkateshwara Temple, West:House of

K.Srinivas, North:P.W.D. Road (Karimnagar to Kama Reddy) and SOuth:Open land of Lessor.

(b)That the defendant approached the plaintiff and requested him to give the suit schedule property on lease to him for the purpose of running educational institution. Accordingly the plaintiff agreed to give the same and defendant have entered into Registered lease agreement document bearing No.7855 of 2023 with the plaintiff for the suit schedule property on 15th May, 2023 for the purpose of running educational institution. The agreed rent is Rs.70,304-00 (Rupees Seventy

Thousands Three Hundred and Four Only) per month commences from 15.05.2023 to 14.05.2028 and it is to be paid on or before 5th of every month promptly. That as per the term No.18 of registered lease deed dated 15.05.2023, the defendant agreed to pay simple interest @ 36% per annum in case of belated payment of monthly rent.

Page 3 ASCJ – cum – Addl.Asst.Sessions Judge, Karimnagar.

OS No.694 of 2025 (FAIR)

(c) The defendant is not paying rents of suit schedule premises to the plaintiff since May, 2023 and thereby the defendant become defaulter in payment of rents.

The plaintiff several times demanded the defendant to pay arrears of rents from

May, 2023 to till today. But the defendant on one or the other pretext postponing payment of rents.

(d)In the month of May, 2024, the plaintiff went to suit schedule premises and demanded for rent from May, 2023 to April, 2024 then the defendant promised to pay the arrears of rent within one month, for which the plaintiff agreed but as per the promise the defendant not paid. Finally having disgusted with the attitude of the defendant, plaintiff on 01.11.2024 demanded the defendant to pay the arrears of rents and to vacate the suit premises within one month, for which the defendant refused to pay arrears of rent and to vacate the suit schedule premises and threatened the plaintiff with dire consequences. In this regard several panchayaths were conducted before the caste elders who advised the defendant to pay the arrears of rents to the plaintiff and to vacate the suit schedule premises. But the defendant did not heed the advise of the elders and refused to pay the arrears of rents amounting to Rs.13,00,624-00 paisa to the plaintiff hence, the plaintiff is constrained to file the suit for eviction and possession against the defendant along with recovery of rental amounts. Since the defendant is not paying the rents from 15.05.2023 to 30.11.2024 for (18 1/2)

Page 4 ASCJ – cum – Addl.Asst.Sessions Judge, Karimnagar.

OS No.694 of 2025 (FAIR)

months, comes to Rs.13,00624-00 paisa and interest @ 36% per annum from 05.06.2023 to 05.12.2024 which come sto Rs.3,41,854-00 paisa. Hence, the suit.

3.Summons served on defendant. Defendant failed to appear before this

Court. Hence, defendant was set exparte.

4.During the course of trial, plaintiff examined himself as PW1 and got marked Ex.A1 to A7 and one Gaddam Kishan Goud was examined as PW.2 on behalf of plaintiff.

5.Heard the learned counsel for plaintiff and perused the material available on record.

6.Now the point for consideration is:

1. Whether the plaintiff is entitled to recover the arrears of rent amount

and eviction of defendant from the suit premises as prayed for?

2. To what relief?

Point No.1:

7.Plaintiff filed the suit that he leased out suit schedule premises to defendant for a period of five years through registered lease deed. Defendant took the possession of the said premises but he failed to pay the agreed rent as per the lease deed from May 2023. Further he has not paid any rent as agreed by them, since the date of lease deed. Plaintiff sent the legal notice but defendant did not responded. As defendant failed to pay rental amount and also failed to vacate the suit premises. Hence the suit.

Page 5 ASCJ – cum – Addl.Asst.Sessions Judge, Karimnagar.

OS No.694 of 2025 (FAIR)

8.Plaintiff is seeking eviction of defendant from the suit schedule premises and seeking a direction to the defendant to pay arrears of rent from the date of lease deed along with the interest.

9.In this regard, plaintiff got examined himself has PW.1 and one Gaddam

Kishan Goud as PW.2, who was present at the time of entering into a registered lease by plaintiff and defendant vide lease deed bearing document No.4855 of 2023 on 15.05.2023, in respect of the suit schedule property for running an educational institution. PW.1 filed the chief affidavit in lieu of chief examination while re-iterating the averments of the plaint and got marked Ex.A1 to A7 documents to support his version. Ex.A1 is the Certified Copy of lease deed vide document No.4855 of 2023 dated:15.05.2023, Ex.A2 is the Office Copy of legal notice dated:25.11.2024, Ex.A3 is the Postal Receipt dated:25.11.2024, Ex.A4 is the Acknowledgment Card dated:27.11.2024, Ex.A5 is the office copy of legal notice dated:20.01.2025, Ex.A6 is the Postal Receipt dated:20.01.2025 and

Ex.A7 is the Acknowledgment Card dated:22.01.2025.

10.In a nut shell plaintiff/PW.1 deposed that he leased out the suit schedule property to defendant for running educational institution vide registered lease agreement document bearing No.4855 of 2023 on 15.05.2023, after agreeing the terms of the agreement the defendant signed on it. But as per the agreement, the defendant did not paid rents of suit schedule property to plaintiff since May,

Page 6 ASCJ – cum – Addl.Asst.Sessions Judge, Karimnagar.

OS No.694 of 2025 (FAIR)

2023. On the demand of plaintiff for payment of arrears of rent, the defendant, on one or the other pretext postponing payment of rents. On disgusting the attitude of defendant, the plaintiff demanded to vacate the suit premises within one month, for which the defendant refused for payment of arrears of rent and to vacate the suit premises and threatened the plaintiff with dire consequences.

PW.2 filed chief affidavit and supported the testimony of PW.1.

11.On perusal of the record, Ex.A1 lease deed vide document No.4855/2023

dated:15.05.2023 shows that it was entered in between plaintiff and defendant on

15.05.2023, wherein it was shown the lease period starts from 15.05.2023 and end by 14.05.2028 i.e., for a period of 5 years with the monthly lease amount of

Rs.70,304/- and payable on or before 5th of every month. In lease deed, there is mention of other terms of lease. It is also agreed by the both parties that the lessee/defendant shall pay an interest of 36 % per year, in case of belated payment of monthly rent. It is also mentioned that if rent is due for more than six months, then the lease deed conditions would not be in force and the lessor is permitted to go for further action without any notice. On perusal of Ex.A2 to A7 shows that the plaintiff got issued legal notices on 25.11.2024, on 20.01.2025 to defendant through registered post and on receiving the same, the defendant failed to reply and also failed to pay the arrears of rents or vacate the suit premises.

Page 7 ASCJ – cum – Addl.Asst.Sessions Judge, Karimnagar.

OS No.694 of 2025 (FAIR)

12.Defendant failed to appear and contest the claim of plaintiff. The evidence of plaintiff remained unchallenged. The documents Ex.A1 clearly proves that defendant has obtaining suit schedule property on lease from the plaintiff with the promise to pay the rents on or before 5th of every month and to pay simple interest @ 36% per annum in case of belated payment of monthly rent. The oral evidence of plaintiff clinchingly points out that defendant failed to pay monthly rent as agreed by him. Therefore, this point, is answered in favour of plaintiff and against defendant.

Point No.2:

13.In view of the discussions in point No.1, the plaintiff is entitle to receive arrears of rent and eviction of defendant from suit premises.

14. In the result, the suit is decreed without costs as follows:

1. Defendant is directed to vacate the suit premises and to deliver vacate possession of the suit schedule premises to the plaintiff within two months from the date of Judgment, in case defendant failure to hand over suit schedule premises within two months, the plaintiff is at liberty to proceed as per the law for the eviction of defendant.

2.Defendant is directed to pay the arrears of rent of Rs.16,42,475/- (Rupees Sixteen Lakhs Forty Two Thousands Four Hundred and Seventy

Page 8 ASCJ – cum – Addl.Asst.Sessions Judge, Karimnagar.

OS No.694 of 2025 (FAIR)

Five Only) to the plaintiff along with future interest @ 12% per annum on due rental amount from the date of suit till the date of decree and @ 6% per annum from the date of decree till the date of realization.

Typed to my dictation by Stenographer directly on computer, corrected and pronounced by me, in the open court on this the 9 th day of October, 2025.

Addl. Senior Civil Judge - cum -Addl.Asst. Sessions Judge, Karimnagar.

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

WITNESS EXAMINED

FOR THE PLAINTIFF:FOR THE DEFENDANT:

PW.1Koduri Mahendar- Ex-parte -

PW.2Gaddam Kishan Goud

EXHIBITS MARKED

FOR THE PLAINTIFF: Ex.A1is the CC of lease deed vide Document No.4855/2023

dated:15.05.2023.

Ex.A2is the Office Copy of Legal Notice, dated:25.11.2024.

Ex.A3is the Postal Receipt, dated:25.11.2024.

Ex.A4is the Acknowledgment Card dated:27.11.2024.

Ex.A5is the Office Copy of Legal Notice, dated:20.01.2025.

Ex.P6is the Postal Receipt dated:20.01.2025.

Ex.P7is the Acknowledgment Card 22.01.2025.

FOR THE DEFENDANT: - Nil -

Addl. Senior Civil Judge - cum -Addl.Asst. Sessions Judge, Karimnagar.