Smt Pramila Jain

FairPage 1 of 5OS No. 9 of 2021

IN THE COURT OF THE JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE CUM JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF

FIRST CLASS, DHARMAPURI

PRESENT:- Dr; Smt. Pramila Jain, Junior Civil Judge cum Judl. Magistrate of F.C., Dharmapuri.

Friday, the 29th day of July, 2022

Original Suit No. 09 of 2021

Between :- Suddala Ramesh, S/o. Kanthaiah, R/o. Velgatoor village and mandal of Jagtial District. …Plaintiff. // Versus //

Singu Srinivas, S/o. Venkaiah, R/o. Rayapatnam village of Dharmapuri mandal. …Defendant. * * *

This suit is coming on the 27th day of July, 2022 for final hearing before me, in the presence of Sri Bandela Ramesh and K. Gangarajam, Advocates for the Plaintiff and defendant remained ex-parte; and having stood over for consideration till this day, the Court delivered the following:-

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

1.The suit is filed by the plaintiff under Order VII Rule 1 and 2 r/w Section 26 of

Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 against the defendant for recovery of money of

Rs.4,02,000/- (Rs.3,00,000/- principal amount and Rs.1,02,000/- interest).

2.The brief facts of the plaint are that the Plaintiff and defendant are known to each other since long time, out of said acquaintance the defendant apprached the plaintiff in month of month of March, 2020 and requested hand loan of an amount of Rs.3,00,000/- to meet his necessities. On 01.04.2020 the plaintiff had given Rs.1,60,000/- and Rs.1,40,000/- to the defendant as hand loan and by receiving the said amount the defendant has executed two promissory notes in favour of plaintiff by agreeing to repay the same on demand in the presence of witness. Subsequently, plaintiff several times approached the defendant and demanded to repay the above said loan amount but the defendant with deliberate intention postponed the same. Therefore, on 12.08.2021 plaintiff

FairPage 2 of 5OS No. 9 of 2021 got issued a legal notice to the defendant by demanding the defendant to repay the loan amount. But, on 19.08.2021 the defendant bluntly refused to take registered postal cover of legal notice. Finally, on 12.09.2021 plaintiff again demanded the defendant to repay the loan amount but the defendant with a malafide intention refused to repay the loan amount by denying the very execution of the promissory notes. Therefore, the plaintiff filed this suit for recovery of sum of Rs.4,02,000/- (Rs.3,00,000/- principle amount and

Rs.1,02,000/- towards interest @ 24% per annum thereon from 01.04.2020 to 01.09.2021) Hence, this suit.

3.Summons were served on defendant and Sri Ch.Mallaiah and Sri S. Karthik,

Advocates Vakalat on behalf of defendant but failed to file the written statement even after the stipulated period. Therefore, the defendant was set ex-parte on 12.04.2022.

4.During the course of trial, plaintiff himself examined as P.W1 and also got examined P.W2 and got marked Ex.A.1 to A.5 in order to support the case of plaintiff. There is no contest by the defendant since the defendant was set ex- parte.

5.Heard the counsel for the plaintiff.

6.Point for Consideration is:Whether the plaintiff is entitled for recovery of

Rs.3,00,000/- and interest amount of Rs.1,02,000/-, total of Rs.4,02,000/- as prayed for?

POINT :-

7.P.W.1 filed his chief-affidavit before the Court and sworn-in before the Court and stated that since a long time he knew the defendant, out of said acquaintance, the defendant approached PW1 in the month of March, 2020 and requested a hand loan of amount of Rs.3,00,000/- for his necessities. On that, on 01.04.2020 PW1 gave Rs.1,60,000/- and Rs.1,40,000/- as hand loan to the

FairPage 3 of 5OS No. 9 of 2021 defendant. On receiving the said amount the defendant has executed two promissory notes in favour of PW1 by agreeing to repay the same on demand in presence of the witnesses, PW2 signed on the promissory notes as guarantor.

When PW1 approached the defendant several times and demanded to repay the loan amount, but the defendant with deliberate intention postponed the same and failed to repay the same. P.W.1 and PW2 further submitted that PW1 got issued a legal notice, dated 12-08-2021 to the defendant and the said legal notice was refused by defendant with a malafide intention. PW1 and PW2 further stated that finally, on 12.09.2021 PW1 again demanded the defendant for repayment of loan amount but the malafide defendant not only refused to repay the amount but also denied the very execution of the promissory notes.

PW1 and PW2 further deposed that defendant was financially sound person but later the defendant was sold out his entire properties for his liabilities in the society except agriculture land of Ac.1-04 ½ guntas in Sy.No. 225/A situated at

Velgatoor village and mandal which is standing in the name of defendant along with one Narendula Mohan (PW2) who is guarantor for the loan amount in promissory notes which was purchased from one Rangu Madhukar through registered sale deed document No. 569/2018, dated 24.01.2018. The defendant is planning to sell out his entire share in the property, but the other joint registrar who is a surety for defendant's hand loan i.e. PW2 is stopping defendant's efforts. But, the defendant is strongly trying to alienate his part of share in the property, as such, PW1 filed the suit.

8.P.W.1 filed documents which were marked as Ex.A.1 to Ex.A.4. P.W.2 filed document which was marked as Ex.A.5. Ex.A.1 is the original promissory note,

dated 01-04-2020 executed by the defendant in favour of plaintiff with regard

to the transaction of Rs.1,60,000/-. Ex.A.2 is the original promissory note, dated 01-04-2020 executed by the defendant in favour of plaintiff with regard to the transaction of Rs.1,40,000/-. Further, the plaintiff issued a legal notice i.e. Ex.A3

FairPage 4 of 5OS No. 9 of 2021 but the defendant refused the same, which discloses the entire transaction of amount, interest, promissory note and demand made therein to the defendant for repayment of the same. Ex.A4 is the return postal cover which establishes that it stands in the name of the defendant which was addressed by the counsel for plaintiff. The presumption in the Law is that the legal notice was received by the person to whom it was addressed, admittedly, no reply was got issued by the defendant to Ex.A3, which implies that the defendant admitted the contents of Ex.A3 and consequently the suit debt. Ex.A4 is the refused postal cover. Ex.A5 is the certified copy of sale deed document No. 569/2018, dated 24.01.2018 obtained from Sub – Registrar, Jagtial. There is nothing that is appearing from the Ex.A1 to A4 to cast any doubt or aspersion on the payment of amount of Rs.4,02,000/- to the PW1.

9.There is no rebuttal and counter to the case of P.W.1 by defendant. Thus, the plaintiff as P.W.1 is able to establish that plaintiff had merits for seeking decree for the suit amount. Point is therefore answered in favour of the plaintiff.

10. In result, the suit is decreed with costs for Rs.4,02,000/- (Rupees four lakhs and two thousand only) with interest @ 12% per annum on principal amount of

Rs.3,00,000/- (Rupees three lakhs only) from the date of suit till the date of decree and @ 6% per annum from the date of decree till realization.

Typed to my dictation, corrected and pronounced by me in the open court on this the 29 th day of July, 2022.

Junior Civil Judge cum Judl. Magistrate of F.C., Dharmapuri.

FairPage 5 of 5OS No. 9 of 2021

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

WITNESSES EXAMINED

FOR THE PLAINTIFF :- FOR THE DEFENDANT :-

P.W.1 : Suddala Ramesh.-Ex.Parte- P.W.2 : Narendula Mohan.

EXHIBITS MARKED

FOR THE PLAINTIFF :-

Ex.A1 is the original promissory note, dated 01.04.2020. Ex.A2 is the original promissory note, dated 01.04.2020. Ex.A3 is the office copy of Legal Notice, dated 12.08-2021. Ex.A4 is the refused postal cover, dated 19-08-2021. Ex.A5 is the certified copy of sale deed document No. 569/2018, dated 24.01.2018 obtained from Sub – Registrar, Jagtial.

FOR THE DEFENDANT :- -Nil-

Junior Civil Judge cum Judl. Magistrate of F.C., Dharmapuri.

Page 1 of 3

IN THE COURT OF THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS, DHARMAPURI

PRESENT:- Dr; Smt. Pramila Jain, Judl. Magistrate of First Class, Dharmapuri.

Wednesday, the 27 th day of July, 2022

PRC No. 54 of 2022

in

(Crime No. 49 of 2022, PS, Dharmapuri)

Between :-

The State of Telangana represented by Sub Inspector of Police, Dharmapuri.

...Complainant.

// A N D //

Madasu Chandraiah, S/o. Lingaiah, 49 years, Munnurukapu, R/o. Dhonur village. … Accused.

* * *

This case coming before me on this day for committal in the presence of the learned incharge APP for the Complainant/State and Sri K.Durgaiah, Advocate for Accused; having been heard and stood over for consideration, this Court made the following :-

:: O R D E R ::

1-The Sub Inspector of Police, PS, Dharmapuri had filed the charge sheet against the accused for the offences punishable Under Sections 307 and 498-A of Indian

Penal Code (In short IPC) alleging as follows :

2-It is the case of the prosecution that, on 02.02.2022 at 06-00 hours, one

Dwaraka Mallaiah (de facto complainant/LW1) lodged a complaint stating that he is a resident of Dhonur village, he had four daughters. His second daughter

Madasu Rama (LW2) marriage was solemnized with the accused and they had two children namely Soniya and Sai Kumar. Accused used to harass his wife

Rama (LW2) in drunken state. In this regard so many panchayaths were conducted before the elders, but the accused did not change his attitude and further the accused threatened Rama (LW2) with dire consequences to kill. On

Page 2 of 3 01.02.2022 at 8-30 pm neighbour of Rama (LW2) by name Pala Manasa (LW5) made a phone call to Mallaiah (LW1) and stated that accused beat Rama (LW2), poured petrol over her body and set ablaze. On receiving the same, Mallaiah (LW1) along with his granddaughter by name Soniya (LW4) rushed there and shifted Rama (LW2) to Government Civil Hospital, Jagtial and now Rama (LW2) getting treatment. Mallaiah (LW1) further stated in the complaint that accused harassed Rama (LW2) by mentally, physically and poured petrol and set ablaze with an intention to kill her. Hence, Dwaraka Mallaiah (LW1) requested to take necessary action.

3-Basing on the said contents of the report, E.Kiran Kumar, (LW12), Sub Inspector of Police, PS, Dharmapuri has registered a case in Crime No. 49 of 2022 for the offences punishable under Sections 307 and 498-A of IPC, issued FIR and took up investigation. During the course of investigation, SI of Police (LW12) examined and recorded the statement of Dwaraka Mallaiah (de facto complainant/LW1) and referred LW1 to Government hospital for treatment.

Later, SI of Police proceeded to Government Civil Hospital, Jagtial, examined and recorded the statement of Madasu Rama (LW2) and later, SI of Police proceeded to the scene of offence, conducted Scene of offence panchanama (C.D.F.) in the presence of Gangula Shankaraiah and Buddula Anjaiah (LW6 and

LW7), examined and recorded the statements of witnesses. On 03.02.2022 at 10-30 hours the SI of Police (LW12) apprehended the accused at his house at

Dhonur village and on interrogation accused voluntarily confessed the offence and later the accused was sent to Court for judicial remand. After completion of investigation SI of Police (LW12) filed charge sheet for the offence punishable

U/Sec. 307 and 498-A of IPC against the accused.

4-This case was taken on file for the offence punishable under Sections 307 and 498-A of IPC against the accused. On appearance of accused, the copies of documents were furnished to him as required U/Sec.207 of Cr.P.C., and he stated

Page 3 of 3 that he got sufficient means to engage an Advocate to defend him before the

Court of Sessions.

5-The offences alleged against the accused are U/Sec.307 and 498-A of IPC out of which the offence U/Sec.307 of IPC is exclusively triable by the Hon’ble Court of

Sessions. Hence, case is committed to the Hon’ble Court of Sessions, Jagtial, as

required under Section 209 (a) of Cr.P.C.

6-Accused is on bail granted by the Honourable II Additional District and Sessions

Judge, Karimnagar at Jagtial vide Cr.M.P. No.154 of 2022 in Crime No. 49 of

2022 of PS, Dharmapuri, dated 23.04.2022. After binding over the accused on furnishing personal bond for Rs.50,000/-, Accused is directed to appear before the Hon'ble Sessions Court, Jagtial U/Sec. 209 (b) of Cr.P.C. as and when receipt of summons/intimation. The case record should be submitted to the the

Hon'ble Court of Sessions, Jagtial and the material objects to be produced

before the Hon'ble Sessions Court, Jagtial as and when intimation received

U/Sec. 209 (c) of Cr.P.C.

7-The order of committal to be notified to the Public Prosecutor U/Sec.209 (d) of

Cr.P.C.

Dictated to Stenographer, transcribed by him, corrected and pronounced by me in the

Open Court on this the 27 th day of July, 2022.

Judl. Magistrate of F.C., Dharmapuri.

TSKA170023942022

Presented on : 27-04-2022 Registered on : 27-04-2022 Decided on : 17-08-2022 Duration : 0 years, 3 months, 20 days

IN THE COURT OF

Junior Civil Judge

AT DHARMAPURI ,KARIMNAGAR

(Presided Over by Smt Pramila Jain)

CC/1031/2022

Exhibit No. (PROSECUTION):

SHO, PS, BUGGARAM

Through Police Station Officer BUGGARAM 09 , Dharmapuri

DHARMAPURI KARIMNAGAR

SHO, PS, BUGGARAM

VERSUS : A1 - Nakka Laxmi Age: 45 Occupation : Buggaram village and mandal.

2:A2 - Nakka Rajavva Age: 65 Occupation :

3:A3 - Upparam Mallavva Age: 40 Occupation ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- APP for State }: APP, Advocate for appearing for A1 - Nakka Laxmi Advocate , appearing for , 2, 3 respectively. -----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Offence punishable under : 290,506 r/w 34 of INDIAN PENAL

CODE,

ORDER

A1 to a3 called present, copies of documents furnished them,A1 to A3 examined U/sec. 251 of Cr,p.c. Accused No.1 to A3 pleaded guilty and admitted the offences. I am satisfied that the admission is made voluntarily by the a1 to A3 hence I found the A1 to a3 are guilty of the offences punishable U/s.290 and 506 r/w 34 of Ipc Accordingly the A1 to A3 are Convicted U/s. 252 of Cr.p.c. and sentenced to pay a fine of Rs. 200/- each in dafault, to suffer simple imprisonment for one day for the offence punishable U/s.290 r/w 34 of Ipc. A1 to A3 are further sentenced to pay a fine of rs.2000/- each imprisonment for one month for the offence punishable U/s.506 r/w 34 of Ipc Total Fine of Rs.6600/-

Date : 17-08-2022 (Smt Pramila Jain)

Junior Civil Judge

DHARMAPURI KARIMNAGAR

Visit ecourts.gov.in for updates or download mobile app “eCourts Services ” from Android or iOS

TSKA170034742022

Presented on : 30-04-2022 Registered on : 30-04-2022 Decided on : 27-07-2022 Duration : 0 years, 2 months, 27 days

IN THE COURT OF

Junior Civil Judge

AT DHARMAPURI ,KARIMNAGAR

(Presided Over by Smt Pramila Jain)

CC/1457/2022

Exhibit No. (PROSECUTION):

SHO.PS. VELGATOOR

Through Police Station Officer VELGATOOR 04 , Dharmapuri

DHARMAPURI KARIMNAGAR

SHO.PS. VELGATOOR

VERSUS: Podeti Ravi Age: 43 Occupation : Stambapally village of velgatoor mandal ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- APP for State }: APP, Advocate for appearing for Podeti Ravi Advocate appearing for , respectively. -----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Offence punishable under : 290,506, of INDIAN PENAL CODE,

ORDER

Accused called present and examined U/Sec.251 of Cr.P.C. Accused pleaded guilty and admitted the offences. I am satisfied that the admission is made voluntarily by the Accused. Hence, I found the Accused is guilty of the offences punishable U/Sec. 290 and 506 of IPC. Accordingly, the Accused is convicted under Section 252 of Cr.P.C and sentenced to pay a fine of Rs.200/- (Rupees two hundred only) in default, to suffer simple imprisonment for one (1) day for the offence punishable U/Sec.290 of IPC. Accused further sentenced to pay a fine of Rs.2,000/- (Rupees two thousand only) in default, to suffer simple imprisonment for one (1) month for the offence punishable U/Sec. 506 of IPC. (Total Fine of Rs.2,200/-) (Rupees two thousand and two hundred only).

Date : 27-07-2022(Smt Pramila Jain)

Junior Civil Judge

DHARMAPURI KARIMNAGAR

Visit ecourts.gov.in for updates or download mobile app “eCourts Services ” from Android or iOS

TSKA170003372022

Presented on : 05-01-2022 Registered on : 05-01-2022 Decided on : 20-07-2022 Duration : 0 years, 6 months, 15 days

IN THE COURT OF

Junior Civil Judge

AT DHARMAPURI ,KARIMNAGAR

(Presided Over by Smt Pramila Jain)

STC/7/2022

Exhibit No. (PROSECUTION):

SHO PS DHARMAPURI

Through Police Station Officer

, DHARMAPURI

DHARMAPURI KARIMNAGAR

SHO PS DHARMAPURI

VERSUS :

JANGA GANESH

Age: 2 Occupation : R/O. KUKKALAGUDUR OF PALAKURTHY MANDAL.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------- APP for State }: SR APP, Advocate for appearing for JANGA GANESH Advocate appearing for , respectively. -----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Offence punishable under : 85,130/177 of MOTOR VEHICLES ACT,

ORDER

NBW Pending against the respondent. Police called absent. As the matter is STC, the proceedings of the present case was stopped U/Sec. 258 of Cr.P.C. till execution of NBW.

Date : 20-07-2022 (Smt Pramila Jain)

Junior Civil Judge

DHARMAPURI KARIMNAGAR

Visit ecourts.gov.in for updates or download mobile app “eCourts Services ” from Android or iOS