Sri P. David

CIVIL JUDGE (SENIOR DIVISION)

Court of Senior Civil Judge,, Yellamanchili (Taluka) · Visakapatnam · Andhra Pradesh

Sri P. David, CIVIL JUDGE (SENIOR DIVISION), is posted at Court of Senior Civil Judge,, Yellamanchili (Taluka), Visakapatnam, Andhra Pradesh, India. 270 court orders on record since 2010. 5 judgments with full text available. Primarily handles OS, SC, EP cases.

270

Total Orders

Judgments

Orders/Month

Posting

Featured Judgments

OS/100091/2011

State bank of India yellamanchili Branch vs Duvva Nagasubrhmanyam and another

25 Apr 2013

IN THE COURT OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE; YELLAMANCHILI.

Present:- Sri. P.David, M.A.,B.L.,

Senior Civil Judge

Thursday, this the 25th day of April, 2013

ORIGINAL SUIT No.91/2011

Between:

State Bank of India, Yellamanchili, Rep., by its Branch Manager, Presently S.K.Sahu, S/o. Trinadh Sahu, 36 years, R/o. Yellamanchili.

…Plaintiff.

And:

1.Duvva Naga Subrahmanyam, S/o. Rama Rao, 53 years, Teacher, MP. Elementary School, Jarlla village, Munchingput Mandal, Paderu.

2.Kurada Venkata Satyanarayana Murthy, S/o. Varahala Rao, 49 years, Teacher, M.P.U.P. School, Atchutapuram. … Defendants.

This suit coming on 15-4-2013 for hearing before me in the presence of Sri N.R.S.T.Roy, Advocate for Plaintiff and Sri J.Prasad Rao, Advocate for the Defendant No.2 and D.1 set exparte and having stood over till this day for consideration this court delivered the following:

J U D G M E N T

This is a suit seeking decree for Rs.2,52,858/- with interest, costs and such other reliefs.

1.The Querns contention is that:- The plaintiff is State Bank of India,

Yellamanchili, represented by its Branch Manager. The defendants are teachers by profession. D.1 is the principal Borrower and D.2 is the guarantor . D.1 had applied to the plaintiff bank on 18-4-2008 for sanction of loan of Rs.2,20,000/-. The plaintiff bank sanctioned the same by observing the formalities. Both D.1 and D.2 signed respective documents. The loan has to be discharged within 60 equal monthly installments @

Rs.5062/- per month. Unfortunately the D.1 failed to adhere to the terms and conditions and not even bothered to respond to the legal notice. Hence this suit.

2.While the suit is coming for filing written statement D.1 did not file the written statement and his counsel represented that no instructions, therefore D.1 was called absent and set exparte and D.2 has field his written statement which run as thus:- He denied the very certitude of the document replied upon by the plaintiff bank and he is uncertain whether he signed the document or not. His contention is that in fact both D.1 and D.2 approached the plaintiff bank and filed application for sanction of loan , the plaintiff bank obtained their signatures but did not sanction the loan. Later the 1st defendant informed him that the plaintiff bank did not sanction the loan as he 2 did not comply the necessary terms and conditions. Even if there is loan sanction to

D.1 the plaintiff bank has to exhaust the remedies against D.1 and he being guarantor his liability is secondary, therefore the suit against him is liable to be dismissed and prayed the court to dismiss the suit.

3.Those pleadings lead to formulate the following issues:-

1.Whether the plaintiff bank is entitled for the suit amount as prayed for?

2.Whether D.2 is not liable jointly and severally to discharge the suit debt along with D.1?

3.Whether D.1 did not take the loan amount from the plaintiff bank and no necessity to discharge the suit debt?

4.To what relief?

4.In order to substantiate their respective cases the plaintiff bank examined

Pardhasarathi Misra the Branch manager, as PW.1 and the then Branch Manager

K.Kiran Kumar as PW.2 and exhibited Ex.A.1 toA.7. On the other hand the 2dn defendant himself examined s DW.1 and marked no documents on his behalf.

5.Heard both counsels.

6.ISSUE NOS.1 AND 3: The contesting defendant’s contention is that in fact himself and 1st defendant principal borrower approached the plaintiff bank and

D.1 applied to the plaintiff bank for sanction of loan , then the plaintiff bank obtained their signatures and requested to comply some terms. Since D.1 did not comply the terms the loan was not sanctioned. Unfortunately the singed papers lying with the plaintiff bank, taking advantage of their signatures in those documents filed the suit. In fact the plaintiff bank has to proceed against D.1 and only after exhausting remedies against him the suit has to file against him. If it is so the heavy burden is on the plaintiff bank to prove the execution of the documents and sanction of loan.

7.PW.1 the present branch manager has reiterated the plaint averments and exhibited Ex.A.1 to A.7., His evidence is quite clear that on 18-4-2008 D.1 approached the plaintiff bank for sanction of loan of Rs.2,20,000/- and the plaintiff bank sanctioned the same and D.2 stood as guarantor. The defendants agreed to the rules and the regulations of the plaintiff bank and agreed to repay the same with interest @ 13.50 % within 60 installments @ Rs.5062/- . Since the D.1 did not properly paid the installment amounts and finally stopped payments, as no other go launched the suit. PW.2 the then Branch manager is specific that he worked as Branch

Manager, SBI Yellamanchili branch in the year 2008 when the defendants borrowed the 3 amount from the plaintiff bank. The defendants executed the necessary documents and both of them under took to repay the amount as per the terms and conditions. The amount sanctioned was Rs.2,20,000/- on 18-4-2008. The rate of interest is @ 13.50% per annum with monthly rests. The installments amount is Rs.5062/- for 60 monthly installments. D.2 also signed as guarantor.

8.EX.A.1 is the loan application dt. 18-4-2008 executed by both the defendants. Ex.A.2 is the arrangement letter dt. 18-4-2008, Ex.A.3 is the loan agreement dt. 18-4-2008 , Ex.A.4 is the guarantee agreement dt. 18-4-2008 signed by

D.2, E.A.5 is the office copy of legal notice dt. 22-2-2011 , Ex.A.6 is the served acknowledgment. Ex.A.7 is the statement of account of ledger folio.

9.Both PWs 1 and 2 were thoroughly cross examined by D.2’s counsel. In the cross examination PW.1 has answered that principal borrower is D.1 and he was not the officer at the time of sanctioning the loan and he is looking after the affairs of loan and D.1 committed default on 22-2-2011 and the statement of account Ex.A.7 shows

D.1 committed default on 14-2-2011. Ex.A.5 shows D.1 committed default on 17-2- 2011 and till such time plaintiff bank received installments from the salary of D.1. He further answered that by the time of default D.1 was in service and further D.1 is the

principal borrower and even at present D.1 is in service and D.2 is the guarantor. He

denied that the plaintiff bank has to file suit against D.1 alone and later only to file the suit against D.2 and this suit is field only to harass the 2nd defendant without exhausting the remedies. The cross examination of PW.2 is nothing but suggestions and the suit was filed against D.2 only to harass him.

10.In rebuttal the 2nd defendant who is examined as DW.1 reiterated the written statement averments. In the cross examination DW.1 has answered that he is the guarantor to D.1 and he signed Ex.A.4 after going through the contents, further he signed Ex.A.6 and admitted that the plaintiff bank sent Ex.A.5 legal notice . Further answered that himself and D.1 signed said documents voluntarily, further admitted that himself is also liable to pay the amount along with D.1. Ex.A.4 is the guarantee agreement and Ex.A.5 is the office copy of legal notice, Ex.A.6 is the postal acknowledgment in which he signed in token of receipt of legal notice. That apart even the defendant’s admission is suffice to believe that himself and D.1 signed the papers voluntarily. This defendant is harping to deduct even the payments made by D.1. Even as per PW.1 under Ex.A.7 D.1 paid amounts up to 14-2-2011 . Ex.A.7 shows outstanding amount is Rs.1,93,988 /- as on 14-2-2011 and interest up to 28-3-2011 4 was calculated and added as Rs.58,870/-. The total claim is Rs.2,52,858/- and the plaintiff bank proved the suit claim and as such the plaintiff bank is entitled for the suit amount as prayed for. Hence these issues are answered in favour of plaintiff bank.

11.ISSUE NO.2:Sec. 128 of Contract Act cast liability on the guarantor also and he shall sail along with principal borrower and his liability is equal to that of the principal borrower. Therefore the question of proceeding against principal borrower and filing the suit against guarantor after exhausting remedies does not arise.

Further DW.1 has admitted that he is liable to pay the suit amount along with D.1.

Hence this issue is answered against the D.2.

12.ISSUE NO.4: In the result, the suit is decreed with costs for

Rs.2,52,858/- ( Rupees two lakhs fifty two thousand eight hundred and fifty eight only) with interest @ 13.50% p.a, from the date of the suit, till the date of decree and with subsequent interest at 6% p.a, from the date of decree, till the date of realization on

principal amount of Rs.2,20,000/-.

Dictated to the Personal Assistant, transcribed by him, corrected and pronounced by me in open court

this the 25th day of April, 2013.

Senior Civil Judge

Yellamanchili

LIST OF WITNESSES EXAMINED

For Plaintiff: For Defendants: P.W.1/ Parthasaradhi Mishra NIL P.W.2/ K.Kiran Kumar.

LIST OF DOCUMENTS MARKED

For Plaintiff: Ex.A.1/ Loan application dt. 18-4-2008 Ex.A.2/ Agreement letter dt. 18-4-2008 Ex.A.3/ Loan agreement dt. 18-4-2008 Ex.A.4/ Guarantee agreement dt. 18-4-2008 Ex.A.5/ Office copy of legal notice dt. 22-2-2011. Ex.A.6/ served acknowledgment. Ex.A.7/ Ledger Folio/ Statement of account.

For Defendants: NIL SCJ/YLM

OS/100022/2012

Union Bank of India vs Sathu Koteswara rao and another

24 Apr 2013

IN THE COURT OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE; YELLAMANCHILI.

Present:- Sri. P.David, M.A.,B.L.,

Senior Civil Judge

Wednesday, this the 24th day of April, 2013

ORIGINAL SUIT No.22/2012

Between:

Union Bank of India, Tuni, Rep. by its Branch manager, D.Kannayya, S/o. Viswanadha Rao, Hindu, 53 years, R/o. Tuni.

…Plaintiff.

And:

1.Sathu Koteswara Rao, S/o. Lingamurthy, 38 years, Head master, PS Elementary School, Chilaka Veedhi, Rampachodavaram Mandal.

2.Ayyagari Lovaraju Ganga Bhavani Laxmana Rao, S/o. Soma Sekharam, 44 years, retired LIC Assistant, Door No.23-18-5, Haripuram Opp. Ramakrihsna Math, Rajahmundry.

… Defendants.

This suit coming on 17-4-2013 for hearing before me in the presence of Sri N.R.S.T.Roy, Advocate for Plaintiff and the defendants set exparte and having stood over till this day for consideration this court delivered the following:

J U D G M E N T

This is a suit seeking decree for Rs.5,12,670/- with interest, costs and such other reliefs.

1.The Querns contention is that:- The plaintiff is Union Bank of India, Tuni, rep. by its Branch Manger,. D.1 is the principal borrower. D.2 is the guarantor. D.1 approached the plaintiff bank for sanction of house loan of Rs.6,00,000/- and the same was granted on 4-4-2008. D.1 had executed pronote on the very same day agreeing to repay the same with interest @ Rs.9.75% per annum with monthly rests and the monthly installment is @ Rs.6354/- payable in 180 installments. In addition to the pronote D.1 had mortgaged the schedule property by creating equitable mortgage. D.2 stood as guarantor. Later D.1 committed default. Since D.1 is unable to pay the amount the plaintiff bank proceeded under Securitization and Reconstruction of

Financial Assets and Enforcement Security Interests Act, 2002 and brought the schedule property for auction and auctioned the same for Rs.4,00,000/- on 22-7-2011 in favour of K.Madhusudhana Rao and the balance is Rs.5,12,670/- . Since both D.1 and D.2 failed to clear the suit debt, this suit is filed.

2.The defendants 1 and 2 remained absent and set exparte.

3.The Branch Manager of plaintiff bank Pererepa Venkata Subrahmanya

Durga Prasad is examined as PW.1 and exhibited Ex.A.1 to 30.

4.Heard plaintiff’s counsel.

5.The point for consideration is :

Whether the plaintiff bank is entitled for the suit amount as prayed for?

6.POINT: P.W.1 is the branch Manager, Union Bank of India, Tuni. His evidence is nothing but replica of the plaint averments. Ex.A.1 is loan application of 1st defendant S.Koteswara Rao in favour of plaintiff bank for Rs.6,00,000/- agreeing to repay the same with interest @ 9. 75% per annum. Ex.A.2 is the demand pronote executed D.1 dt. 4-4-2008, Ex.A.3 is the letter of installment dt. 4-4-2008 , Ex.A.4 is the house loan agreement dt. 4-4-2008 , Ex.A.5 is the letter of guarantee executed by

D.2 in favour of plaintiff bank dt. 4-4-2008 , ex.A.6 is the memorandum of deposit of title deeds dt. 1-4-2008, Ex.A.7 is creation of equitable mortgage dt. 1-4-2008, Ex.A.8 is the affidavit dt. 1-4-2008, Ex.A.9 is the notice issued by the plaintiff bank dt. 17-12- 2008, Ex.A.10 is the returned cover of D.1., Ex.A.11 is the notice issued by the plaintiff bank dt. 16-2-2009, Ex.A.12 is the postal acknowledgment from D.1., Ex.A.13 is the notice issued by the plaintiff bank dt. 28-4-2009, Ex.A.14 is the demand notice to D.1 for payment of over dues by the plaintiff bank dt. 28-4-2009, Ex.A.15 is the revival letter dt. 312009 executed by D.1., Ex.A.16 is the letter of acknowledgment dt. 12-8- 2010, Ex.A.17 is the notice issued by the plaintiff bank dt. 7-6-2010, Ex.A.18 is the postal acknowledgment from D.1., Ex.A.19 is the notice issued by the plaintiff bank dt.

2-8-2010, Ex.A.20 is the postal acknowledgment from D.1 dt. 9-8-2010, Ex.A.21 is the returned cover from D.2, Ex.A.22 is the notice issued by the plaintiff bank dt. 5-8- 2010, Ex.A.23 is the postal acknowledgment from D.1 dt. 9-8-2010, Ex.A.24 is the returned cover of D.2, Ex.A.25 is the paper publication in Deccan Chronicle dt. 24-6- 2010, Ex.A.26 is the paper publication in Andhra Bhoomi. 24-6-2010, Ex.A.27 is the paper publication in The Hindu, dt. 7-8-2010, Ex.A.28 is the paper publication in The

Hindu, dt. 22-11-2010, Ex.A.29 is the copy of sale certificate issued by the bank authorities dt.22-7-2011 in favour of K.Madhusudhana Rao, Auction purchaser issued under Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement Security

Interests Act, 2002 , Ex.A.30 is the copy of statement of account. Plaintiff’s evidence is unchallenged. Plaintiff has proved its case hence the plaintiff bank is entitled for the suit amount as prayed for.

7. In the result, the suit is decreed with costs for Rs.5,12,670/- (Rupees five lakhs twelve thousand six hundred and seventy only) with interest @ 9.75% p.a, from the date of the suit, till the date of decree and with subsequent interest at 6% p.a, from the date of decree, till the date of realization on amount of Rs.5,12,670/-.

Dictated to the Personal Assistant, transcribed by him, corrected and pronounced by me in open court

this the 24th day of April, 2013.

Senior Civil Judge

Yellamanchili

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

LIST OF WITNESSES EXAMINED

For Plaintiff: For Defendants: P.W.1/ P.V.S.D.Prasad NIL

LIST OF DOCUMENTS MARKED

For Plaintiff: Ex.A.1/ Loan application of 1st defendant S.Koteswara Rao. Ex.A.2/ Demand pronote executed D.1 dt. 4-4-2008. Ex.A.3/ Letter of installment dt. 4-4-2008 Ex.A.4/ House loan agreement dt. 4-4-2008 Ex.A.5/ Letter of guarantee executed by D.2 in favour of plaintiff bank dt. 4-4-2008 Ex.A.6/ Memorandum of deposit of title deeds dt. 1-4-2008 Ex.A.7/ Creation of equitable mortgage dt. 1-4-2008, Ex.A.8/ Affidavit dt. 1-4-2008, Ex.A.9/ Notice issued by the plaintiff bank dt. 17-12-2008, Ex.A.10/ Returned cover of D.1. Ex.A.11/ Notice issued by the plaintiff bank dt. 16-2-2009, Ex.A.12/ Postal acknowledgment from D.1. Ex.A.13/ Notice issued by the plaintiff bank dt. 28-4-2009, Ex.A.14/ Demand notice to D.1 for payment of over dues by bank dt. 28-4-2009. Ex.A.15/ Revival letter dt. 312009 executed by D.1. Ex.A.16/ Letter of acknowledgment dt. 12-8-2010, Ex.A.17/ Notice issued by the plaintiff bank dt. 7-6-2010. Ex.A.18/ Postal acknowledgment from D.1. Ex.A.19/ Notice issued by the plaintiff bank dt. 2-8-2010. Ex.A.20/ Postal acknowledgment from D.1 dt. 9-8-2010, Ex.A.21/ Returned cover from D.2. Ex.A.22/ Notice issued by the plaintiff bank dt. 5-8-2010. Ex.A.23/ Postal acknowledgment from D.1 dt. 9-8-2010. Ex.A.24/ Returned cover of D.2. Ex.A.25/ Paper publication in Deccan Chronicle dt. 24-6-2010. Ex.A.26/ Paper publication in Andhra Bhoomi. 24-6-2010. Ex.A.27/ Paper publication in The Hindu, dt. 7-8-2010, Ex.A.28/ Paper publication in The Hindu, dt. 22-11-2010. Ex.A.29/ Copy of sale certificate issued by the bank authorities dt.22-7-2011 in favour of K.Madhusudhana Rao. Ex.A.30/ Statement of account For Defendants: NIL SCJ/YLM

OS/100167/2012

Donthireddy Venkata Reddy vs Gorle Veerabhadra Rao alias Babu Rao and another

24 Apr 2013

IN THE COURT OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE; YELLAMANCHILI.

Present:- Sri. P.David, M.A.,B.L.,

Senior Civil Judge

Wednesday, this the 24th day of April, 2013

ORIGINAL SUIT No. 167/2012

Between: Donthireddy Venkata Reddy, S/o. Ramana Reddy, Hindu, 50 years, Cultivation and Building contractor, R/o. Yellamanchili village and Mandal, Visakhapatnam District. Plaintiff.

And:

1.Gorle Veerabhadra Rao @ Babu Rao, S/o. Bapunaidu, Hindu, aged 40 years, R/o. Ramarayudupalem village, Yellamanchili Mandal, Visakhapatnam District.

2.Gorle Venkata Ramana, S/o. Bapunaidu, Hindu, aged 37 years, R/o. Ramarayudupalem village, Yellamanchili Mandal, Visakhapatnam District. Defendant.

This suit coming on 16-4-2013 for hearing before me in the presence of Sri D.Venkata Rao, Advocate for plaintiff and of the defendants set exparte and having stood over till this day for consideration this court delivered the following:

J U D G M E N T

This is a suit seeking decree for Rs.4,15,700/- with interest, costs and such other reliefs.

1.The Querns contention is that:- The defendants are brothers. Out of necessity they had borrowed Rs.2,80,000/- from the plaintiff on 30-10-2010 to meet their family expenses and executed demand pronote, agreeing to repay the same with interest @ 24 % per annum. Late they flouted terms and conditions and not even bothered to respond to the legal notice. Hence the suit.

2.The defendants were called absent and set exparte.

3.The plaintiff himself examined as P.W.1 and examined the Tumpala Siva

Kasi the attestor as PW.2, Pulla Venkata Rao the scribe as PW.3 and exhibited Ex.A.1 to A.4.

4.Heard plaintiff’s counsel.

5.Point for consideration is:- “Whether the plaintiff is entitled for the suit amount, as prayed for?”

6.POINT: P.W.1 is the plaintiff. His evidence is nothing but replica of the plaint averments. PW.2 is the sole attestor whose evidence goes to show that on 30-10-2010 the defendants jointly borrowed RS.2,80,000/- from the plaintiff and executed suit pronote agreeing to repay the same with interest @ 24 % per annum and he attested the same. PW.3 the scribe D’accord with the evidence of PWs 1 and 2 and the defendants signed the pronote only after receipt of consideration.

7. Ex.A.1 is the suit pronote dt. 30-10-2010 stands in the name of

Donthireddy Venkata Reddy the plaintiff executed by Gorle Veerabhadra Rao @ Babu

Rao and Gorle Venkata Ramana the brothers – defendants for Rs.2,80,000/-. The rate of interest is 24% per annum. Both the defendants signed the pronote across two revenue stamps. PW.2 is the attestor and PW.3 is the scribe. Ex.A.2 is the office copy of legal notice. Ex.A.3 and A.4 are the postal acknowledgments of D.1 and D.2..

Plaintiff’s evidence is unchallenged. Hence plaintiff proved his case and he is entitled for the suit amount as prayed for.

8.In the result, the suit is decreed, with costs for Rs.4,15,700/- (Rupees four lakhs fifteen thousand seven hundred only) with interest @ 24% p.a, from the date of the suit, till the date of decree and with subsequent interest at 6% p.a, from the date of decree, till the date of realization on principal sum of Rs.2,80,000/-.

Dictated to the Personal Assistant, transcribed by him, corrected and pronounced by me in open court

this the 24th day of April, 2013.

Senior Civil Judge

Yellamanchili

LIST OF WITNESSES EXAMINED

For Plaintiff: For Defendants: P.W.1/ D.Venkata Reddy None P.W.2/ T.Siva Kasi P.W.3/ P.Venkata Rao

LIST OF DOCUMENTS MARKED

For Plaintiff: Ex.A.1/suit pronote dt.30-10-2010 for Rs.2,80,000/- Ex.A.2/Office copy of legal notice dt.23-6-2012 Ex.A.3/ postal acknowledgment. Ex.A.4/ postal acknowledgment.

For Defendants: NIL SCJ/YLM

OS/100120/2012

Yellapu suri Apparao vs Rokalla Satyaveni and another

26 Apr 2013

IN THE COURT OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE; YELLAMANCHILI.

Present:- Sri. P.David, M.A.,B.L.,

Senior Civil Judge

Friday, this the 26th day of April, 2013

ORIGINAL SUIT No. 120/2011

Between: Yellapu Suri Appa Rao, W/o. Veerunaidu, 45 years, R/o. Yellamanchili village , post and Mandal, Visakhapatnam District. Plaintiff.

And:

1.Rokalla Satyaveni, W/o. Chinnabbai, Hindu, Housewife, 35 years, R/o. Yerravaram village, Yellamanchili Mandal, Visakhapatnam District.

2.Rokalla Chinnabbai, S/o. late Chinna, Hindu, 40 years, rest do., Defendant.

This suit coming on 23-4-2013 for hearing before me in the presence of Sri Y.Nageswara Rao, Advocate for plaintiff and of the defendants 1 & 2 set exparte and having stood over till this day for consideration this court delivered the following:

J U D G M E N T

This is a suit seeking decree for Rs.2,76,250/- with interest, costs and such other reliefs.

1.The Querns contention is that :- D.1 and D.2 are wife and husband. Out of necessity they borrowed Rs.2,50,000/- from the plaintiff on 10-10-2011 and executed demand pronote, agreeing to repay the same with interest @ 12 % per annum. Later the defendants flouted terms and conditions. Hence the suit.

2.The defendants were called absent and set exparte .

3.The plaintiff himself examined as P.W.1 and examined Pilla Govindu the scribe of pronote as PW.2 and exhibited Ex.A.1.

4.Heard plaintiff’s counsel.

5.Point for consideration is:- “Whether the plaintiff is entitled for the suit amount, as prayed for?”

6.POINT: P.W.1 is the plaintiff. His evidence is nothing but replica of the plaint averments. PW.2 is the scribe. He D’accord with the evidence of PW.1.

Ex.A.1 is the suit pronote dt. 10-10-2011 for Rs.2,50, 000/- stands in the name of

Yellapu Suri Appa Rao the plaintiff executed by Rokalla Satyaveni only and is attested by three attestors. The rate of interest is 12% per annum. The scribe is P.W.2. The evidence of PW.2 is corroborated with each other.

7.A perusal of Ex.A.1 pronote only D.1 signed the pronote across three revenue stamps, therefore liability cast on D.1 alone and suit against D.2 is untenable 2 and liable to be dismissed. Hence plaintiff proved his case against D.1 only and he is entitled for the suit amount as prayed for from D.1 alone.

8.In the result, the suit is decreed with costs against D.1 only for

Rs.2,76,250/- (Rupees two lakhs seventy six thousand two hundred and fifty only) with interest @ 12% p.a, from the date of the suit, till the date of decree and with subsequent interest at 6% p.a, from the date of decree, till the date of realization on

principal sum of Rs.2,50,000/-. Suit against D.2 is dismissed with costs.

Dictated to the Personal Assistant, transcribed by him, corrected and pronounced by me in open court

this the 26th day of April, 2013.

Senior Civil Judge

Yellamanchili

LIST OF WITNESSES EXAMINED

For Plaintiff: For Defendants: P.W.1/ Yellapu Suri Appa Rao None P.W.2/ Pilla Govindu

LIST OF DOCUMENTS MARKED

For Plaintiff: Ex.A.1/ Suit pronote dt.10-10-2011 for Rs.2,50,000/-

For Defendants: NIL SCJ/YLM

OS/100031/2013

Budda Lakshmi vs S.Janaprakasam

26 Apr 2013

IN THE COURT OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE; YELLAMANCHILI.

Present:- Sri. P.David, M.A.,B.L.,

Senior Civil Judge

Friday, this the 26th day of April, 2013

ORIGINAL SUIT No. 31/2013

Between: Budda Laxmi, W/o. Appa Rao, 58 years, Hindu, Household duties, Pathaveedhi, Yellamanchili , Visakhapatnam District. Plaintiff.

And: S.Jnana Prakasam, S/o. Santhanaraju, 52 years, Hindu, Employee, Grade II Foreman, Upper Sileru, G.K.V, Gudem Mandal, Visakhapatnam District. Defendant.

This suit coming on 22-4-2013 for hearing before me in the presence of Sri Y.Dasubabu, Advocate for plaintiff and of the defendant set exparte and having stood over till this day for consideration this court delivered the following:

J U D G M E N T

This is a suit seeking decree for Rs.1,52,533/- with interest, costs and such other reliefs.

1.The Querns contention is that out of necessity the defendant had barrowed Rs.1,00,000/- from the plaintiff on 10-11-2010 and executed demand pronote, agreeing to repay the same with interest @ 24 % per annum. Later the defendant flouted terms and conditions and not even bothered to the legal notice.

Hence the suit.

2.The defendant was called absent.

3.The plaintiff himself examined as P.W.1 and examined Budda Appa Rao the scribe of pronote as PW.2 and exhibited Ex.A.1 to A.3.

4.Heard plaintiff’s counsel.

5.Point for consideration is:- “Whether the plaintiff is entitled for the suit amount, as prayed for?”

6.POINT: P.W.1 is the plaintiff. Her evidence is nothing but replica of the plaint averments. PW.2 is the scribe. He D’accord with the evidence of PW.1.

Ex.A.1 is the suit pronote dt. 10-11-2010 for Rs.1,00,000/- stands in the name of

Budda Laxmi the plaintiff executed by S.Jnana Prakasam the defendant. The rate of interest is 24% per annum. The defendant signed the pronote across revenue stamp.

The pronote is duly attested by two attestors and PW.2 is the scribe. Ex.A.2 is the office copy of legal notice, Ex.A.3 is the postal receipt. Plaintiff’s evidence is unchallenged.

Hence plaintiff proved her case and she is entitled for the suit amount as prayed for.

7.In the result, the suit is decreed, with costs for Rs.1,52,533/- (Rupees one lakhs fifty two thousand five hundred and thirty three only) with interest @ 24% p.a, from the date of the suit, till the date of decree and with subsequent interest at 6% p.a, from the date of decree, till the date of realization on principal sum of

Rs.1,00,000/-.

Dictated to the Personal Assistant, transcribed by him, corrected and pronounced by me in open court

this the 26th day of April, 2013.

Senior Civil Judge

Yellamanchili

LIST OF WITNESSES EXAMINED

For Plaintiff: For Defendant: P.W.1/ P.Satyavathi. None P.W.2/ G.Ramanamma

LIST OF DOCUMENTS MARKED

For Plaintiff: Ex.A.1/ Suit pronote dt.10-11-2010 for Rs.1,00,000/- Ex.A.2/ Office copy of legal notice dt.6-10-2012. Ex.A.3/ Postal receipt.

For Defendant: NIL SCJ/YLM

Order Record 252 total

Case No.	Parties	Date	Type	Outcome
OS/100031/2013	Budda Lakshmi vs S.Janaprakasam	26 Apr 2013	Order On Exgibit	—
OS/100120/2012	Yellapu suri Apparao vs Rokalla Satyaveni and another	26 Apr 2013	Order On Exgibit	—
OS/100091/2011	State bank of India yellamanchili Branch vs Duvva Nagasubrhmanyam and another	25 Apr 2013	Order On Exgibit	—
OS/100022/2012	Union Bank of India vs Sathu Koteswara rao and another	24 Apr 2013	Order On Exgibit	—
OS/100167/2012	Donthireddy Venkata Reddy vs Gorle Veerabhadra Rao alias Babu Rao and another	24 Apr 2013	Order On Exgibit	—
OS/100064/2012	Pappala Ayyalanaidu vs Gandi Jyothi Suvarna Ratnam	23 Apr 2013	Order On Exgibit	—
OS/100110/2010	Tejomurthula Venkatagiri vs Chilukuri Seethamahalaxmi	23 Apr 2013	Order On Exgibit	—
OS/100139/2012	Petchetti Satyavathi vs Masavarapu Apparao	23 Apr 2013	Order On Exgibit	—
AS/100004/2011	YEDLA appyyamma vs Vskadari kasulamma and 2 others	22 Apr 2013	Order On Exgibit	—
OS/100142/2011	Chinni Satyanrayana vs Kota Surya Sankara Rao..D.2 and another	17 Apr 2013	Order On Exgibit	—
OS/100026/2013	Marisa Naga Sattibabu vs Madagala Govinda Rajulu	16 Apr 2013	Order On Exgibit	—
OS/100137/2011	Canara bank, Mamidivada vs Kusumanchi Kirshnaji and others	16 Apr 2013	Order On Exgibit	—
OS/100015/2011	K.J.G.Narayanamma vs Vsthe superintendant akp post office	15 Apr 2013	Order On Exgibit	—
OS/100084/2012	sheik Dariya vs Sheik Hasan Ali and 2 others	12 Apr 2013	Order On Exgibit	—
OS/100060/2012	Chekka Sanyasi vs Nethala Nageswaararao and another	09 Apr 2013	Order On Exgibit	—
SC/100329/2012	S.I. of Police,Nakkapalli vs Dirisala Sattibabu	06 Apr 2013	Order On Exgibit	—
OS/100180/2012	Thota Ganesh vs Gadi Prasada Rao and another	01 Apr 2013	Order On Exgibit	—
AS/100034/2012	Ippaka Sakkubai alias Satyavathi vs Peketi Manikyamba and another	28 Mar 2013	Order On Exgibit	—
SCC/100002/2012	Kannuri Venkata Ramana vs Bheemireddi Ramunaidu	22 Mar 2013	Order On Exgibit	—
SC/100291/2012	Sub Inspctor of police vs Penapolu Raju alias Govindu	22 Mar 2013	Order On Exgibit	—
SC/100330/2012	Sub Inspector of police,Atchutapuram vs Jalli Ramakrishna	22 Mar 2013	Order On Exgibit	—
OS/100036/2011	Esarapu Hanumanthu vs Kantamreddi Demullu	21 Mar 2013	Order On Exgibit	—
OS/100064/2011	Esarapu Hanumanthu vs Kantamreddi Demullu	21 Mar 2013	Order On Exgibit	—
H.M.O.P/100039/2012	Palla Appalaraju alias Appanna vs Palla Devi	21 Mar 2013	Order On Exgibit	—
OS/100003/2012	State Bank of India, Yellamanchili vs Godatha Mercy Roneela Rani Dutt and another	20 Mar 2013	Order On Exgibit	—
AS/100013/2012	GavarasanaSrinivasarao and5others vs Gaddam Nagaratnam alias Chiteemma	19 Mar 2013	Order On Exgibit	—
EP/100037/2012	Rajana Uma Maheswara Rao vs Panduri Talla Rao	19 Mar 2013	Order On Exgibit	—
AS/100010/2011	lagudu bapanamma and 10 others vs Vscheepurupalli chellyyyamma and another	18 Mar 2013	Order On Exgibit	—
OS/100055/2012	Veesam Maheswararao alias Mahesh vs Kalla Srirammurthy alias demudu	16 Mar 2013	Order On Exgibit	—
OS/100122/2008	rekha Appala nanidu vs Vsm.ramana	14 Mar 2013	Order On Exgibit	—
OS/100082/2012	Pilla Govinda vs Pilla Prameela and another	28 Feb 2013	Order On Exgibit	—
OS/100005/2012	Bathula Srilakshmi vs Nethala Nageswararao and another	27 Feb 2013	Order On Exgibit	—
SC/100289/2012	sub inspector of police vs MassaNagab husanam	27 Feb 2013	Order On Exgibit	—
EP/100029/2012	KonathalaVenkataDurgaMahalaxmiSubrahmanya Prasad vs Kadimisetti Y.N.V.K.Hara Gopal	25 Feb 2013	Order On Exgibit	—
SC/100150/2012	S.I. of Police, S.Rayavaram vs Chindada Soma Raju	23 Feb 2013	Order On Exgibit	—
IP/100002/2011	Vijjapu Varaprasad vs Manepalli Easwara Rao and others	22 Feb 2013	Order On Exgibit	—
EP/100016/2011	Bandaru Satyanarayana vs Tumpala Narayanarao	21 Feb 2013	Order On Exgibit	—
SC/100069/2012	State rep.by Inspector of Police vs Gedela Chinna alias China Jogarao	21 Feb 2013	Order On Exgibit	—
H.M.O.P/100032/2011	bandaru gunnarao vs Vsbandaru ramalakshmi	20 Feb 2013	Order On Exgibit	—
AS/100009/2012	antarvedi Venkata Ramana vs Vsantarvedi Manga	18 Feb 2013	Order On Exgibit	—
AS/100024/2012	Antarvedi Manga vs Antarvedi Venkata Ramana	18 Feb 2013	Order On Exgibit	—
AS/100006/2010	gurram meera and others vs Vsneelapudi leela and another	15 Feb 2013	Order On Exgibit	—
H.M.O.P/100010/2012	Vadlamuri Srinivasa rao vs Vadlamuri Prathib ha and another	12 Feb 2013	Order On Exgibit	—
OS/100124/2012	Rai Satya Rao vs Rokalla Chinnabbai and another	07 Feb 2013	Order On Exgibit	—
OS/100046/2012	Gonnabathula Venkataramana vs Vsrokalla Chinnabbai and another	05 Feb 2013	Order On Exgibit	—
OS/100022/2010	Natra Ganga Vijayalakshmi vs Pedireddi Venkata Suryanarayana	29 Jan 2013	Order On Exgibit	—
EP/100048/2012	Dasari Ramayya vs Pandiri Hari Krishna and another	28 Jan 2013	Order On Exgibit	—
OS/100056/2009	Beestti srinivasarao vs Pilla Nagapparao and another	28 Jan 2013	Order On Exgibit	—
OS/100059/2012	Palla Srinuvasu vs Vsturuka Suresh	28 Jan 2013	Order On Exgibit	—
OS/100070/2011	Adari Kannabbai vs Adari Appalaraju and others	28 Jan 2013	Order On Exgibit	—
SC/100211/2011	SI of Police S.Rayavaram vs Doddigallu Ganga Rao and three others.	24 Jan 2013	Order On Exgibit	—
H.M.O.P/100028/2011	kallapalli kumari vs Vskallapalli nanaji	24 Jan 2013	Order On Exgibit	—
AS/100009/2011	adadi nagamani and another vs Vsbaddi appala narsa	21 Jan 2013	Order On Exgibit	—
OS/100053/2010	thurala sugunamma vs Ap transmission corporatiom by its chairman and 3	21 Jan 2013	Order On Exgibit	—
CMA/100008/2012	Viyyapu Appanna Alias Demudu vs Dhooli Ramana	05 Jan 2013	Order On Exgibit	—
OS/100117/2011	P.mygarajan vs Bypa srinubabu and another	03 Jan 2013	Order On Exgibit	—
OS/100122/2011	Adari Krupananda Rao vs Konda Seahayya and another	03 Jan 2013	Order On Exgibit	—
OS/100152/2011	Bathina Annapurna vs Lakkoju Vijayalakshmi and another	03 Jan 2013	Order On Exgibit	—
EP/100016/2012	Kulukuri Ramakoti vs Buluru Kannayya Sastry	28 Dec 2012	Order On Exgibit	—
EP/100028/2012	Dabberu Naga Vani and another vs Vajrapu Sankara Rao	27 Dec 2012	Order On Exgibit	—
OS/100093/2008	Kandregula Demullu and another vs Adari Durgamma and 2 others	27 Dec 2012	Order On Exgibit	—
OS/100034/2012	Nadigatla Chakramma vs Modem Madina Shah	21 Dec 2012	Order On Exgibit	—
OS/100072/2012	Manchala Raja Mohana Rao vs Sakhinapalli Jogi Ratnam	21 Dec 2012	Order On Exgibit	—
OS/100136/2011	Gadi Chittibabu vs Nadimpalli Suryanarayana Raju and another	20 Dec 2012	Order On Exgibit	—
OS/100133/2012	Surisetti Kondamma and another vs Gurram Varahalamma	19 Dec 2012	Order On Exgibit	—
EP/100046/2012	Domtam Gavarraju vs Dubasi Nageswara Rao	17 Dec 2012	Order On Exgibit	—
L.A.O.P/100011/2010	Ruthala Seethamma and 3 others vs Land Acquistion Officer, APIIC, Visakhapatnam	17 Dec 2012	Order On Exgibit	—
SC/100173/2012	SHO, Atchuthapuram vs Gudala Nagarjuna	13 Dec 2012	Order On Exgibit	—
SC/100089/2012	Sub Inspector of Police,Atchutapuram vs VankaDurgalu	12 Dec 2012	Order On Exgibit	—
IP/100001/2011	Palla Esu Varaprasad vs Kadimi Nagendra and 3 othrs.	06 Dec 2012	Order On Exgibit	—
EP/100029/2011	Bikkina Suryanarayana and another vs Vegesina Sitaramaraju	01 Dec 2012	Order On Exgibit	—
OS/100097/2011	Chanram Srinivasu vs Bamidi Laxmi	30 Nov 2012	Order On Exgibit	—
EP/100047/2010	Reddy Narasingaro vs Kundrapu Bhavani	28 Nov 2012	Order On Exgibit	—
OS/100118/2012	Venuthurupalli Jagannadha Rao vs Maddirala Aruna Kumari	27 Nov 2012	Order On Exgibit	—
SC/100246/2011	SI of Police Yellamanchili Town police station vs Prathipati Babu Rao and anothers	23 Nov 2012	Order On Exgibit	—
SC/100147/2012	S.I. of Police, Yellamanchili town ps. vs Lotia Sathibabu	22 Nov 2012	Order On Exgibit	—
OS/100125/2012	mALLA jAGAN mOHAN vs Adari Nageswara Rao and another	21 Nov 2012	Order On Exgibit	—
OS/100025/2012	State bank of India yellamanchili vs Smt Sanivadaparvathi and 9 others	20 Nov 2012	Order On Exgibit	—
OS/100031/2007	Bheemuni narasayyamma vs Bheemuni Suryanarayana and 10 others	14 Nov 2012	Order On Exgibit	—
OS/100045/2009	Bheemuni Suyanarayana and others vs Vsbheemuni narsayyamma	14 Nov 2012	Order On Exgibit	—
OS/100066/2009	Bheemuni narasayyamma vs Bheemuni satyanarayana and another	14 Nov 2012	Order On Exgibit	—
AS/100005/2012	Kasibhatta Satya Sai Sankar vs Aware health and Research Foundation Chairman	06 Nov 2012	Order On Exgibit	—
OS/100135/2011	Pericherla Sita ramaraju vs Gosala Dhana raju	06 Nov 2012	Order On Exgibit	—
OS/100108/2012	Kandikonda Sreenivasa Rao vs Kantipudi Nooka raju	05 Nov 2012	Order On Exgibit	—
SC/100009/2012	SI of police, Atchutapuram vs Kondala Vara Prasad @ John	30 Oct 2012	Order On Exgibit	—
OS/100114/2007	achanta Venkateswarlu and 2 others vs Vsjagatha suri babu another	29 Oct 2012	Order On Exgibit	—
SC/100116/2012	The Sub Inspector of Police, Payakaraopeta vs Pusarla Marinaiah and 3 others	26 Oct 2012	Order On Exgibit	—
SC/100133/2012	S.I.of Police,Payakaraopeta vs Dpmga Dara babu alias pandu and another	20 Oct 2012	Order On Exgibit	—
SCC/100001/2012	Devavarapu Venkateswara Rao vs Esarau Venkata Ramana	17 Oct 2012	Order On Exgibit	—
OS/100104/2012	Yeka Appa Raju vs Masavarapu Appa Rao	10 Oct 2012	Order On Exgibit	—
OS/100088/2011	Kotaru Sanjeeva Rao vs Barre Narayana	08 Oct 2012	Order On Exgibit	—
AS/100004/2012	Bheemarasetti Satyanarayana vs KarriLakshmi and another	05 Oct 2012	Order On Exgibit	—
OS/100050/2011	Gonthina Kasulu vs Malina Ganesh	03 Oct 2012	Order On Exgibit	—
SC/100135/2012	S.I. of Police,Atchutapuram vs Chelluri Naganna and another	29 Sep 2012	Order On Exgibit	—
SC/100125/2012	Sub Inspector of Police Atchutapuram vs Mylapalli Sathibabu alias Hanumanhu	28 Sep 2012	Order On Exgibit	—
AS/100007/2011	thummala venkata ramana vs Vsesarapu pydiratnam and 2 others	27 Sep 2012	Order On Exgibit	—
OS/100031/2012	Senapathi Nageswara Rao vs Rokalla Chinnabbai	27 Sep 2012	Order On Exgibit	—
SC/100003/2012	SI of Police, Payakaraopeta vs Pirla Srinu	27 Sep 2012	Order On Exgibit	—
H.M.O.P/100017/2012	Smt.Pitla Yamani vs Pitla Srinu	26 Sep 2012	Order On Exgibit	—
H.M.O.P/100018/2012	Mylapalli Dhanaraju vs Mylapalli Durga	26 Sep 2012	Order On Exgibit	—

Showing 100 of 252 orders — Log in to browse all pages.

Monthly Orders (Last 12 Months)

Apr 2013		17
Mar 2013		13
Feb 2013		15
Jan 2013		18
Dec 2012		16
Nov 2012		13
Oct 2012		9
Sep 2012		41
Aug 2012		29
Jul 2012		21
Jun 2012		21
May 2012		1

Frequently Asked Questions

How many cases has Sri P. David handled?

Sri P. David has handled 270 court orders since 2010 at Court of Senior Civil Judge,, Yellamanchili (Taluka). The average disposal rate is 7 orders per month.

What types of cases does Sri P. David hear?

Based on available records, Sri P. David primarily handles Civil matters (Original Suits, Execution Petitions) and Criminal matters (Sessions Cases, SCC) at Court of Senior Civil Judge,, Yellamanchili (Taluka).

Where is Sri P. David currently posted?

Sri P. David is posted as CIVIL JUDGE (SENIOR DIVISION) at Court of Senior Civil Judge,, Yellamanchili (Taluka), Visakapatnam, Andhra Pradesh.

Are judgments by Sri P. David available online?

Yes. 5 judgments by Sri P. David are available on Legistro with full text, outcome, and sections cited.

How fast does Sri P. David dispose cases?

Sri P. David disposes approximately 7 cases per month, based on 270 orders handled over their tenure at Court of Senior Civil Judge,, Yellamanchili (Taluka).

Since when is Sri P. David serving?

Sri P. David has been serving at Court of Senior Civil Judge,, Yellamanchili (Taluka) since 2010.

Case Types

OS 44%

SC 16%

EP 14%

H 9%

AS 7%

CMA 4%

L 4%

SCC 2%

Posting History

Apr 2010 — Apr 2013

CIVIL JUDGE (SENIOR DIVISION) · 270 orders

Other Judges at this Court

Smt. P.Vijaya

CIVIL JUDGE (SENIOR DIVISION)

717 orders

Smt. G. Spandana

PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE (JUNIOR DIVISION)

258 orders

Sri. K.ramesh

ADDITIONAL CIVIL JUDGE (JUNIOR DIVISION)

38 orders

← View all judges at Court of Senior Civil Judge,, Yellamanchili (Taluka)