M Yesuratnam

Fair Copy

IN THE COURT OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT GADWAL

FRIDAY, THIS THE 20 TH DAY OF APRIL, 2018

PRESENT: Sri M.Yesuratnam,

Senior Civil Judge, Wanaparthy.

FAC., Senior Civil Judge Gadwal.

O.S.NO. 16 OF 2014

BETWEEN:

Kapil Chit Funds (P) Ltd., Gadwal Branch, Rep. by its authorized person & Branch Manager, Sri. Krishna Hari S/o Shankaraiah aged 31 Years, Occu: Branch Manager, Gadwal. …Plaintiff.

And

1.T.Karrenna S/o Savaranna age 34 Yrs, Occu: PC 10th Battalion, Beechupally, 2.M. Surya Rao S/o Thavadu age 54 Yrs, Occu: PC 10th Battalion,Beechupally, 3.G.Ramesh S/o Chinna Balaiah age 34 Yrs, Occu: PC 10th Battalion, Beechupally, 4.V.Srinivasulu S/o Venkat Swamy age 34 Yrs, Occu: 10th Battalion, Beechupally.

…Defendants.

This Original Suit coming before me on 13-04-2018 for final hearing in the presence of Sri. K. Ravi Prakash Goud, Advocate for plaintiff and defendant were set- exparte and having stood over for consideration till this day, this court delivered the following:

J U D G M E N T

The suit is filed for recovery of amount of Rs. 1,09,131/-.

2

1. The brief averments of the plaint are that the plaintiff- company for recovery of an amount of Rs. 1,09,131/- along with interest and cost against the first defendant jointed as subscriber of the chit funds scheme of the plaintiffs company as its Gadwal Branch, Mahabubnagar District as per its rules and regulations that was furnished to him and was allotted ticket No.

GWTO3H-13. The total value of the chit being Rs. 3,00,000/- to be subscribed at the rate of Rs. 6,000/- per month for 50 months and signed an agreement of chit with the plaintiff company.

2. In the auction conducted on 27-7-2010 at Gadwal Branch as per the rules regulations of the chit in respect of the above chit, the first defendant herein participated and became successful bidder having agreed to forego Rs. 1,00,900/- out of the total chit amount of Rs. 3,00,000/- which was duly confirmed by the plaintiff company. After deducting the company’s commission from the fore gone amount the balance was distributed among all the subscribers in the above mentioned chit series ass dividend. In order to draw the prize chit amount, the successful bidder had a furnish solvent sureties/ guarantors to the satisfaction of the company of regular payment of the entire future monthly installments of the prized subscriber.

3

3. The fist defendant had paid Rs. 1,98,952/- inclusive of dividends till the date of auction and his future liability being Rs.

3,00,000/-. The first defendant furnished defendant No. 2 to 4 as guarantors/ sureties who jointly executed as agreement of guarantee dated: 26-06-2010 in favour of the plaintiff company agreeing to guarantee due payment of the amount due to the company by the first defendant. Thus by virtue of the said agreement of guarantee, the defendant No.2 to 4 also became jointly and severally liable for payment of Rs. 1,99,100/- being the entire amount of future installments together with interest @ 12 % per annum in case of default made by the first defendant in payment of monthly installments. All the defendants also executed a joint promissory note dated:

7-9-2010 Rs. 1,98,000/- as collateral security.

4 The first defendant was received Rs. 1,99,100/- by cheque

No. 572736, 572735, Andhra Bank, Gadwal Branch, Thus the total amount being Rs. 1,99,100/-. The first defendant executed as cash voucher in support of the said payment.

5. The first defendant up to paid 34 installments in full inclusive of dividends and thereafter committed default in paying the installments from 15-10-2012. Inspite of repeated 4 demands made by the plaintiff company, the defendants failed to pay the dues.

6. The plaintiff company finally on 11-03-2013 demanded the defendants, to pay the sum Rs. 1,01, 048/-by getting issued registered legal notice under section 25 (10) of A.P. Chit Funds

Act. The postal receipts are filed herewith. As the defendants did not pay off the entire amount due under the suit chit. The plaintiff company is obliged to file the present suit for recovery of balance amount. The plaintiff is entitled to recover the entire future installments regularly and committed breach of agreement. Therefore, the plaintiffs is entitled to sue and the defendants are liable to be sued. Defendants is severally have failed to repay the loan amount as per the terms and conditions of the agreement, although the plaintiff-company demanded in server times. The defendants is liable for discharge of the loan amount and severally. Hence, this suit.

7. After receiving the summons from the court, the defendants No.1 to 4 called absent on the day i.e. 23-03-2018 when the suit was posted for their appearance and remained ex-parte.

5

8. To substance its case, the plaintiff- company the branch manager examined as Pw.1 and got marked Ex.A1 to A9

9. Heard arguments from the learned counsel for the plaintiff –company.

10. Now the point for consideration is :-

1)Whether the plaintiff – company is entitled for the relief of suit claim amount from the defendants No.1 to 4 by way of preliminary and final decree as prayed for?.

11. Point:- I have perused the plaint, the chief evidence of affidavit of Pw.1 and Exs.A1 to A9 and also the material evidence on record. In order to prove the pleadings, the plaintiff-company Manager himself examined as Pw-1 and got marked Exs.A-1 to A9. He deposed in his chief-examination affidavit by re-iterating the plaint pleadings once again.

However, the Pw- 1 relied upon the documentary evidence i.e., the Ex. A1: C.C. of certificate in corporation of plaintiff company dated 01-05-1981., Ex.A2: C.C. of authorization., Ex.A3:

Original Agreement of chit dated 31-03-2009., Ex.A4: Original

Agreement Guarantee dated 26-06-2010., Ex.A5: Original

Promissory note dated 07-09-2010., Ex. A6: Original Cash payment voucher dated 7-9-2010., Ex.A7: Office Copy of legal notice dated 11-03-2010., Ex.A8: Original postal Receipts dated 6 09-04-2013., Ex.A9: Statement of Account 18-04-2013., On careful perusal of the Exs. A-1 to A9, it corroborates the oral evidence of

Pw-1 with regard to the date of the execution Ex.A2 in favour of the plaintiff-company by the defendants No.1 to 4 and the defendants received consideration of Rs.3,00,000/- on loan

Agreement with Hypothecation deed of seeking a loan at the interest rate of Rs. 12.00% per annum.

12. On future careful perusal of the oral and documentary evidence available on record, this court holds that the plaintiff- company proved that the defendant executed Ex.A-1 to A-9 in favour of the plaintiff-company and the defendants is received

Rs. 3,00,000,/-, and thereafter the defendant is not made any repayment as per the statement of account in Ex.A-1 to A-9. On the basis of unchallenged evidence of Pw-1, the suit claim of the plaintiff-company is proved on the strengthen of the plaintiff- company’s oral evidence and documentary evidence the Ex.A- 1 to A-9. Hence, the plaintiff-company is entitled for suit amount i.e. Rs.1,09,131/-. Accordingly, the point is answered in favour of the plaintiff- company.

13. In the result, this suit is decreed with costs by passing a decree infavour of the plaintiff-company against the defendants Nos. 1 to 4 for a sum of Rs. 1,09,131/- (Rupees One 7 lakhs nine thousand one hundred and thirty one only ) with subsequently interest @ 10.25 % per annum from the date of filing suit, till the date of decree and thereafter future interest @ 6 % per annum from the date of decree till the date of realization on principal amount of Rs. 3,00,000/- (Rupees Three lakhs only).

Typed to my dictation to the Typist, and corrected and

pronounced by me in the open court, on this the 20th day of

April, 2018.

SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE,

GADWAL.

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

WITNESSES EXAMINED FOR

PLAINTIFF: DEFENDANT:

PW-1.V.Mallaiah - None-

EXHIBITS MARKED FOR

Plaintiffs:

Ex. A1: C.C. of certificate in corporation of plaintiff company

dated 01-05-1981

Ex.A2: C.C. of authorization Ex.A3: Original Agreement of chit dated 31-03-2009 Ex.A4: Original Agreement Guarantee dated 26-06-2010 Ex.A5: Original Promissory note dated 07-09-2010 Ex. A6: Original Cash payment voucher dated 7-9-2010 Ex.A7: Office Copy of legal notice dated 11-03-2010 Ex.A8: Original postal Receipts dated 09-04-2013 Ex.A9: Statement of Account dated 18-04-2013.

SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE,

GADWAL.

Fair Copy

IN THE COURT OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT GADWAL

FRIDAY, THIS THE 20 TH DAY OF APRIL, 2018

PRESENT: Sri M.Yesuratnam,

Senior Civil Judge, Wanaparthy.

FAC., Senior Civil Judge Gadwal.

O.S.NO. 163 OF 2017

BETWEEN:

State Bank of India, Gadwal Branch Rep. by its Branch, Manager …Plaintiff.

And

1.Boravelli Satya Reddy S/o Bheem Reddy, aged 70 Years, Occu: Agriculture, R/o H.No. 5-51, Gurronipally H/o Mannapur, Dharur Mandal.

2.Boravelli Gopal Reddy S/o Satya Reddy, aged 40 Years, Occu: Agriculture, R/o H.No. 5-51, Gurronipally H/o Mannapur, Dharur Mandal. …Defendants.

This Original Suit coming before me on 06-04-2018 for final hearing in the presence of Sri. T.Manohar, Advocate for plaintiff and defendant were set- exparte and having stood over for consideration till this day, this court delivered the following:

J U D G M E N T

The suit is filed for recovery of amount of Rs. 8,88,184/-.

1. The brief averments of the plaint are that the plaintiff – bank for recovery of an amount of Rs. 8,88,184/- along with interest and cost against the defendants is submitted by the plaintiff- 2 bank being in need financial assistance for the purpose of ATL loan the defendants No.1 approached the plaintiff –bank seeking a loan of Rs. 3,00,000/- for which the plaintiff –bank agreed to finance them by opening their joint loan account No.

30228488734. The interest was stipulated at the rate of Rs. 13-25% per annum with subject to revision from time to time changes.

The defendants No.1 and 2 have jointly mortgaging the land bearing Sy.No. 358/C extent of Ac. 4-20gts., Sy.No. 358/A extent of Ac. 2.10gts., and Sy.No. 358/A extent of Ac. 2.10gts. total extent of Ac. 9-00 respectively situated in the limits of Mannapur village of Dharur Mandal, Jogulamba Gadwal District in favour of the plaintiff –bank by executing the Regd. Mortgagen deed

Doc. No. 4685/2007 dated: 03-07-2007 towards the security of loan amount. The defendants No.1 and 2 have also jointly executed a deed Hypothecation dt: 22-08-2007, Application for agricultural credit, deed of agreement in favour of the plaintiff-bank towards the security of the loan amount. The defendant No. 1 and 2 have also deposited their ownership pass books respectively in favour of the plaintiff-bank towards the security of the loan amount. All the said documents are filed herewith for kind perusal. The defendants Nos.1 and 2 have jointly and severally failed to repay the loan amount, the plaintiff-bank caused to the present suit for recovery amount of

Rs. 8,88,184/- with accrued interest. Defendants is severally have 3 failed to repay the loan amount as per the terms and conditions of the agreement, although the plaintiff-bank demanded in server times. The defendants is liable for discharge of the loan amount and severally. Hence, this suit.

2. After receiving the summons from the court, the defendants No.1 and 2 called absent on the day i.e. 20-10-2017 when the suit was posted for their appearance and remained ex-parte.

3. To substance its case, the plaintiff-bank the branch manager examined as Pw.1 and got marked Ex.A1 to A7.

4. Heard arguments from the learned counsel for the plaintiff –bank.

5. Now the point for consideration is :-

1)Whether the plaintiff – bank is entitled for the relief of suit claim amount from the defendants No.1 and 2 by way of preliminary and final decree as prayed for?.

6. Point:- I have perused the plaint, the chief evidence of affidavit of Pw.1 and Exs.A1 to A7 and also the material evidence on record. In order to prove the pleadings, the plaintiff-bank Manager himself examined as Pw-1 and got 4 marked Exs.A-1 to A7. He deposed in his chief-examination affidavit by re-iterating the plaint pleadings once again.

However, the Pw- 1 relied upon the documentary evidence i.e., the Ex. A1: Original loan Application for Agriculture Credit .,

Ex.A2: Original Regd. Mortgage deed No. 4685/2007., Ex.A3:

Original deed of Agreement., Ex.A4: Original deed of

Agreement of loan., Ex.A5: Ownership pass book No. 663181 (Def.No.1)., Ex.A6: Ownership pass book No. W. 576243 (Def.

No.2)., Ex.A7: Statement of Account., On careful perusal of the

Exs. A-1 to A7, it corroborates the oral evidence of Pw-1 with regard to the date of the execution Ex.A2 in favour of the plaintiff-bank by the defendants No.1 and 2 and the defendants received consideration of Rs.3,00,000/- on loan

Agreement with Hypothecation deed of seeking a loan at the interest rate of Rs. 13.25% per annum.

7. On future careful perusal of the oral and documentary evidence available on record, this court holds that the plaintiff- bank proved that the defendant executed Ex.A-1 to A-7 in favour of the plaintiff-bank and the defendants is received

Rs. 3,00,000,/-, and thereafter the defendant is not made any repayment as per the statement of account in Ex.A-1 to A-7. On the basis of unchallenged evidence of Pw-1, the suit claim of the plaintiff-bank is proved on the strengthen of the plaintiff-bank’s 5 oral evidence and documentary evidence the Ex.A-1 to A-7.

Hence, the plaintiff-bank is entitled for suit amount i.e.

Rs. 8,88,184/-. Accordingly, the point is answered in favour of the plaintiff- bank.

8. In the result, this suit is decreed with costs by passing a preliminary decree infavour of the plaintiff-bank against the defendants Nos. 1 and 2 for a sum of Rs. 8,88,184/- (Rupees

Eight lakhs eighty eight thousand one hundred and eight four only ) with subsequently interest @ 10.25 % per annum from the date of filing suit, till the date of decree and thereafter future interest @ 6 % per annum from the date of decree till the date of realization on principal amount of Rs. 3,00,000/- (Rupees three lakhs only). Time for redemption is granted for three months.

Typed to my dictation to the Typist, and corrected and

pronounced by me in the open court, on this the 20th day of

April, 2018.

SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE,

GADWAL.

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

WITNESSES EXAMINED FOR

PLAINTIFF: DEFENDANT:

PW-1. Chinta Chandsrasekhar - None-

EXHIBITS MARKED FOR

6

PLAINTIFFs:

Ex. A1: Original loan Application for Agriculture Credit

Ex.A2: Original Regd. Mortgage deed No. 4685/2007

Ex.A3: Original deed of Agreement

Ex.A4: Original deed of Agreement of loan

Ex.A5: Ownership pass book No. 663181 (Def.No.1)

Ex.A6: Ownership pass book No. W. 576243 (Def. No.2)

Ex.A7: Statement of Account.

SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE,

GADWAL.

IN THE COURT OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT GADWAL

FRIDAY, THIS THE 20 th DAY OF APRIL, 2018

PRESENT: Sri M.Yesuratnam,

Senior Civil Judge, Wanaparthy,

FAC., Senior Civil Judge, Gadwal.

O.S.NO. 07 of 2018.

BETWEEN:

K.Mukesh Kumar, S/o K.Anjaneyulu, 35 Yrs, R/o: 56/89-2-3, Sankar Mandir Street, Kurnool.

…Plaintiff.

And

T.Thikkanna S/o Chinnaiah, age: -nil- R/o: H.No.63/45, Chitambara Rao Street, Kurnool City and District.

…Defendant.

Claim:- Suit for specific performance of contract.

-*-*-*-*-

This Original Suit coming before me for hearing in the presence of Sri

V.Narayana, Advocate for plaintiff and the defendants remained exparte and upon perusing the material on record and having stood over for consideration till this day, this court delivered the following:

J U D G M E N T

This suit is filed under Order VII Rules 1 r/w Section 26 of CPC seeking a decree for specific performance of contract, basing on the agreement of sale dated: 06-01-2015.

2. The brief averments of the plaint is that the defendant is the owner, possessor and pattedar of the suit schedule eland, situated in the limits of

Pedda Dhanwada village limits of Alampur mandal and he offered to sell the said land and the plaintiff is agreed to purchase the same. Both parties have entered into an agreement of sale on 06-01-2015 for a total sale consideration of Rs.4,50,000/- and the plaintiff paid an amount of

Rs.2,50,000/- on the date of said agreement as an advance and further 2 agreed to pay the remaining balance sale consideration within six months and get the registered sale deed executed. The defendant also agreed for the same and acknowledged the receipt of the advance amount.

Later on 10-04-2015 the plaintiff paid the remaining sale consideration of

Rs.2,00,000/- to the defendant and the same was endorsed on the back side of the sale agreement. On several approaches by the plaintiff the defendant did not turn up to execute the registered sale deed in the name of the plaintiff. At last the plaintiff issued lawyer’s notice on 29-09-2017 calling upon the defendant to come and execute the registered sale deed, but in vain. Hence the suit.

3. The defendant after receiving the summons failed to appear before this court and set exparte.

4. To substantiate his case, the plaintiff examined himself as Pw1 and got marked Exs.A1 to A6 on his behalf.

5. Heard and perused the record.

6. In the wake of the submissions the following points emerge for determination namely:-

1. Whether the defendants have executed the suit agreement of sale dated 06-01-2015 in favour of the plaintiff?

2. Whether the plaintiff is ready and willing to perform his part of the contract arising under the suit agreement of sale?

3. Whether the defendant has refused to execute the registered sale deed for the suit schedule lands in favour of the plaintiff inspite of the plaintiff ready to pay the balance sale consideration and legal notice issued on behalf of the plaintiff?

4. Whether the plaintiff is entitled for specific performance of the suit agreement of sale as prayed for?

5. To what relief?

7. Points 1 to 4:- It is evident from the testimony of plaintiff as Pw1 and also the averments of the plaint that that the defendants have executed the suit agreement of sale in favour of the plaintiff to sell the suit schedule 3 properties for a total consideration of Rs.4,50,000/-. that the defendant is the owner, possessor and pattedar of the suit schedule eland, situated in the limits of Pedda Dhanwada village limits of Alampur mandal and he offered to sell the said land and the plaintiff is agreed to purchase the same. Both parties have entered into an agreement of sale on 06-01-2015 for a total sale consideration of Rs.4,50,000/- and the plaintiff paid an amount of Rs.2,50,000/- on the date of said agreement as an advance and further agreed to pay the remaining balance sale consideration within six months and get the registered sale deed executed. The defendant also agreed for the same and acknowledged the receipt of the advance amount. Later on 10-04-2015 the plaintiff paid the remaining sale consideration of Rs.2,00,000/- to the defendant and the same was endorsed on the back side of the sale agreement. On several approaches by the plaintiff the defendant did not turn up to execute the registered sale deed in the name of the plaintiff. At last the plaintiff issued lawyer’s notice on 29-09-2017 which is marked as Ex.A3 calling upon the defendant to come and execute the registered sale deed which is marked as ExA1.

8. Having regard to the aforesaid discussion, and as the plaintiff has established his case and his readiness and willing to perform his part of contract under Ex.A1 and as the defendant has failed to rebut the case of the plaintiff, this court holds that the plaintiff is entitled for the relief claimed in the suit. These points are answered infavour of the plaintiff and against the defendant.

9. Point NO.5:- In the result, the suit is decreed with costs in favour of the plaintiff and against the defendant by directing the defendant to execute a registered sale deed in respect of the suit schedule property in favour of the plaintiff within two months from today and deliver possession thereof. If the defendant fails to execute the registered sale deed as 4 aforesaid, the plaintiff is entitled to seek the execution of registered sale deed in respect of the suit schedule property through process of law.

Typed to my dictation to the Stenographer Grade-I, XI ADJ Court,

Wanaparthy corrected and pronounced by me in the open court, this the 20th day of April, 2018.

SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE,

GADWAL.

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

WITNESSES EXAMINED FOR

PLAINTIFF: DEFENDANT: ---nil---

PW1 K.Mukesh Kumar

EXHIBITS MARKED FOR

PLAINTIFF: Ex.A1 is original agreement of sale deed dt.06-01-2015 Ex.A2 is original payment endorsement dated: 10-04-2015 Ex.A3 is office copy of legal notice dated: 29-09-2017 Ex.A4 is postal receipt dated: 29-09-2017 Ex.A5 is postal acknowledgment card Ex.A6 is ROR dated: 03-08-2015

DEFENDANT: ---nil---

SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE,

GADWAL.

Draft Copy

IN THE COURT OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT GADWAL

FRIDAY, THIS THE 20 th DAY OF APRIL, 2018

PRESENT: Sri M.Yesuratnam,

Senior Civil Judge, Wanaparthy.

FAC., Senior Civil Judge Gadwal.

O.S.NO. 164 OF 2017

BETWEEN:

State Bank of India, Gadwal Branch Rep. by its Branch, Manager. …Plaintiff.

And

G. Sridhar Reddy S/o Khanganth Reddy, aged 36 Years, Occu: Agriculture, R/o: Shaikpally village , Itikyala Mandal, Jogulamba Gadwal District.

…Defendant.

This Original Suit coming before me on 13-04-2018 for final hearing in the presence of Sri. T. Manohar, Advocate for plaintiff and defendant were set- exparte and having stood over for consideration till this day, this court delivered the following:

J U D G M E N T

The suit is filed for recovery of amount of Rs. 9,12,292/-.

1. The brief averments of the plaint are that the plaintiff – bank for recovery of an amount of Rs. 9,12,292/- along with interest and cost against the defendant is submitted by the 2 plaintiff-bank with an application for a financial assistance for the purpose of ATL loan the defendant approached the plaintiff bank seeking a loan of Rs. 4,50,000/- for which the plaintiff-bank agreed to finance him by opening his loan account No. 30182627814. The interest was stipulated at the rate of Rs.12.75 % per annum with subject to revision from time to time changes. The defendant mortgaging the land bearing

Sy.No. 390/B extent of Ac.9.36gts., and Sy.No. 391/2 extent of

Ac.1.14gts., total extent of Ac.11.10 gts. situated in the limits of

Sasanool Village of Itikyal Mandal, Jogulamba Gadwal District.

in favour of the plaintiff-bank by executing the Regd. Mortgage deed Doc. No.1542/2007 11-05-2007 towards the security of loan amount. The defendant also executed a deed of

Hypothecation Agreement dt. 31-05-2007, Application from for

Agricultural credit, Deed of Agreement in favour of the plaintiff- bank towards the security of the loan amount. The defendant also deposited his ownership passbook in favour of the plaintiff – bank towards the security of the loan amount. All the said documents are filed herewith for kind perusal. These are facts of cause of action arose in this suit. The defendant has failed to repay the loan amount as per the Terms and conditions of the agreements, although the plaintiff-bank demanded in several times. The defendant failed to repay the loan amount, the plaintiff –bank caused to file present suit for recovery amount of 3

Rs. 9,12,292/- with accrued interest. The defendant is liable for discharge of the loan amount and severally. Hence, this suit.

2. After receiving the summons from the court, the defendant called absent on the day i.e. 05-01-2018 when the suit was posted for their appearance and remained ex-parte.

3. To substance its case, the plaintiff-bank the branch manager examined as Pw.1 and got marked Ex.A1 to A4.

4. Heard arguments from the learned counsel for the plaintiff –bank.

5. Now the point for consideration is :-

1)Whether the plaintiff – bank is entitled for the relief of suit claim amount from the defendant by way of preliminary and final decree as prayed for?.

6. Point:- I have perused the plaint, the chief evidence of affidavit of Pw.1 and Exs.A1 to A4 and also the material evidence on record. In order to prove the pleadings, the plaintiff-bank Manager himself examined as Pw-1 and got marked Exs.A-1 to A4. He deposed in his chief-examination affidavit by re-iterating the plaint pleadings once again.

However, the Pw- 1 relied upon the documentary evidence 4 i.e., the Ex. A1: Original Application form for Agril. Credit., Ex.A2:

Original Regd. Mortgage deed No. 1542/2007., Ex.A3: Original deed of Hypothecation Agreement., Ex.A4: Statement of

Account. On careful perusal of the Exs.A-1 to A4, it corroborates the oral evidence of Pw-1 with regard to the date of the execution Ex.A2 in favour of the plaintiff-bank by the defendant and the defendant received consideration of Rs.4.,50,000/- on loan Agreement with Hypothecation deed of seeking a loan at the interest rate of Rs. 12.75% per annum.

7. On future careful perusal of the oral and documentary evidence available on record, this court holds that the plaintiff- bank proved that the defendant executed Ex.A-1 to A-4 in favour of the plaintiff-bank and the defendant is received

Rs. 4,50,000/-, and thereafter the defendant is not made any repayment as per the statement of account in Ex.A-1 to A-4. On the basis of unchallenged evidence of Pw-1, the suit claim of the plaintiff-bank is proved on the strengthen of the plaintiff-bank’s oral evidence and documentary evidence the Ex.A-1 to A-4.

Hence, the plaintiff-bank is entitled for suit amount i.e.

Rs.9,12,292/-. Accordingly, the point is answered in favour of the plaintiff- bank.

8. In the result, this suit is decreed with costs by passing a preliminary decree infavour of the plaintiff-bank against the 5 defendant for a sum of Rs. 9,12,292/- (Rupees Nine lakhs towel thousand two hundred and ninety two only) with subsequently interest @ 10.25 % per annum from the date of filing suit, till the date of decree and thereafter future interest @ 6 % per annum from the date of decree till the date of realization on principal amount of Rs. 4,50,000/- (Rupees Four lakhs fifty thousand only).

Time for redemption is granted for three months.

Typed to my dictation to the Typist, and corrected and

pronounced by me in the open court, on this the 20th day of

April, 2018.

SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE,

GADWAL.

{{{{{}}

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

WITNESSES EXAMINED FOR

PLAINTIFF: DEFENDANT:

PW-1. Chinta Chandrasekhar - None-

EXHIBITS MARKED FOR

Plaintiffs: Ex. A1: Original Application form for Agril. Credit Ex.A2: Original Regd. Mortgage deed No. 1542/2007 Ex.A3: Original deed of Hypothecation Agreement Ex.A4: Statement of Account.

SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE,

GADWAL.

Fair Copy

IN THE COURT OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT GADWAL

FRIDAY, THE 27 th DAY OF APRIL, 2018.

PRESENT: Sri M.Yesuratnam,

Senior Civil Judge, Wanaparthy,

FAC., Senior Civil Judge, Gadwal.

H.M.O.P.No.67 of 2017

BETWEEN:

1. Lalitha D/o Telugu Pedda Narasimhulu W/o Desamoni Khasim, 22 Yrs, R/o: Boravelli Village, Manopad Mandal, Mahabubnagar District.

2. Desimoni Khasim S/o late Krishnaiah, 32 Yrs, Native of Antharam Village Tandur Mandal, Presently R/o: H.No.179, Father Agnelo road, near Ganesh Mandir Umel Man, Vasai West Bassim Road, Thane, Maharastra State.

...Petitioners.

Claim:- Petition filed under Section 13-B of Hindu Marriage Act to grant decree of divorce on mutual consent.

-*-*-*-*-

This original petition coming before me for hearing on this day in the presence of Sri Singaraju Laxmanna, Advocate for petitioners and having stood over for consideration till this day, this court made the following:

O R D E R

1. This petition is filed U/s 13-B of the Hindu Marriage Act by the petitioners jointly who are wife and husband respectively seeking divorce by mutual consent.

2. The brief averments of this petition are that the marriage between both petitioners was solemnized on 02-05-2014. After the marriage, both petitioners lived together as wife and husband in the house of the petitioner No.2. Out of their wedlock, the petitioners have blessed no issues. Later, differences arose in between the petitioners and were separated and living separately since 22-04-2016. There is no chance of re- 2 union and the petitioners finally decided to take divorce by mutual consent. Hence the petition.

3. To substantiate their case the petitioners filed their chief affidavits of

PWs1 and 2 and no documents are marked.

4. I have perused the affidavit jointly filed by the petitioners stated in their affidavit and that the marriage between both petitioners was solemnized on 02-05-2014 at at house of the groom as per customs prevailing in Hindu Community. After the marriage, they lived happily for six months. Thereafter some difference arose in between them, which cannot be pacified. There are serious differences and misunderstandings arose between them resulting into the separation and living separately since 22-04-2016. There is no scope of reunion between them and the doors of any possibility of reunion are closed. Hence they filed the petition jointly for decree of divorce, by mutual consent. There is no chance of their re-union and finally decided to take divorce by mutual consent.

Number of negotiations made through elders of their families and caste men to reunion them but the negotiation become unfruitful and their attitude did not corroborate with each other.

5. Since the parties have submitted that they have filed this petition voluntarily and have not withdrawn their consent and also stated that their reunion is not possible as their relationship is irretrievably broken down, this court holds that the marriage between parties shall be dissolved by passing a decree of divorce U/s 13 B of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955.

3

6. In the result, this petition is allowed by dissolving the marriage between petitioners, dated 02-05-2014 and granted decree of divorce by in terms of section 13 B of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955. No costs.

Typed to my dictation to the Stenographer Grade-I, IX ADJ Court, Wanaparthy corrected and pronounced by me in the open court, on this the 27th day of April, 2018.

SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE,

GADWAL.

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

Witnesses examined for PW1Smt. Lalitha PW2 Desamoni Khasim

EXHIBITS MARKED

---NIL---

SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE,

GADWAL.