Smt R.shanthi Shree

IN THE COURT OF THE PRINCIPAL JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE, TUNI

PRESENT:R.SHANTHISREE, PRL.JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE

Thursday, the 27 th day of April, 2017

Original Suit No.59/2017

Between: Kaliboyina Apparao, S/o Sathyam, Aged 61 years, Hindu, Retired Employee, D.No.3-60, Lovakothuru, Tuni Mandal, Tuni PJCJC limits. ...Plaintif

And

Dulam Lakshmi, W/o Satyanarayana, aged 50 years, Hindu, Housewife, D.No.11-81, Lovakothuru, Tuni Mandal, Tuni PJCJC limits.

..Defendant

This suit is coming on 27-4-2017 for final hearing before me in the presence of Sri B.Ravi Kumar, Advocate for Plaintiff and Defendant was called absent remained set exparte and the matter having stood for over consideration till today this court delivered the following:

J U D G M E N T

1. This is a suit for recovery of an amount of Rs.44,720/-(Rs. 22,360/- + Rs. 22,360/-)(Rupees forty four thousand seven hundred and twenty only) basing on two suit promissory notes with subsequent interest and for costs.

2. The brief averments of plaint are as follows:

The defendant borrowed an amount of Rs.13,000/-(Rupees thirteen thousand only) and Rs.13,000/-(Rupees thirteen thousand only) towards for her family expenses and to discharge sundry debts on 22-11-2013 from the plaintiff and undertaking to repay the same to the plaintiff or to his order together with interest at the rate of 24% p.a and executed a demand promissory note infavour of the plaintiff at Lovakothuru. Though the interest is contacted to be at the rate of 24% with yearly rests, but the plaintiff restricts his claim for interest at 24% p.m with simple interest.

After receiving the said loan amount the defendant did not pay any amounts to the plaintiff. The plaintiff demanded the defendant to repay the said promissory notes amount on one pretext or other. But it is in vain.

Therefore the plaintiff filed this suit.

3. The defendant was set exparte.

4. In order to prove the case of the plaintiff, the plaintiff himself was examined as PW1 and reiterated his case as in plaint. He also filed Ex.A1 and A2.

5. Heard perused the evidence of PW1 coupled with the two suit promissory notes. The defendant was set exparte. The evidence of PW1 was unchallenged. I did not find any infirmities in the evidence of PW1.

The plaintiff safely established the execution of Ex.A1 and A2 and passing of consideration there under. The suit claim is held proved.

7. In the result, the suit is decreed for sum Rs.44,720/-

(Rs.22,360/- + Rs.22,360/-)(Rupees forty four thousand seven

hundred and twenty only)with subsequent interest at the rate of

12% p.a on Rs.26,000/- (Rs.13,000/- + Rs.13,000/-) from the date of

presentation of the plaint till the date of decree and at the rate of

6% p.a from the date of decree till the date of realization with

costs.

Dictated to Personal Asst. transcribed by her corrected and

pronounced by me in Open Court this the 27th day of April, 2017.

Sd/-R.Shanthisree

PRL.JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE,

TUNI.

:3: O.S 59/2017 :APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

WITNESSES EXAMINED

For Plaintif:

PW1/ 26-4-2017 : Kaliboina Apparao

For Defendant: ..Nil..

DOCUMENTS MARKED

For Plaintif:

Ex.A1: Suit promissory note dated 22-11-2013

Ex.A2: Suit promissory note dated 22-11-2013

For Defendant: ..Nil..

Sd/-R.Shanthisree

PRL.JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE,

TUNI.