CHATAKONDU GOVINDA RAJULU Vs. G SUDHA MADHURI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The plaintiff in O.S. No. 98 of 1999 on the file of the Senior Civil Judge, Kadapa is the appellant. He filed the suit against the respondents for recovery of a sum of Rs. 1,81,810/-, with interest at 18% per annum. He pleaded that late G. Pratap Reddy, the husband of the 1st respondent, and father of the respondents 2 to 4 borrowed a sum of Rs. 95,000/- on 31-08-1994, and executed a promissory note. It was pleaded that he made a part payment of Rs. 500/- on 21-08-1997, and did not pay the balance, by the time he died. The appellant got issued a notice on 18-08-1999 to the respondents, demanding payment. Alleging that the respondents did not pay the amount, he filed the suit.

(2.) The respondents filed a written statement, denying the very execution of the promissory note, by Pratap Reddy. They have also pleaded that the appellant was himself a tenant in a large commercial complex, owned by their family, and that there was no necessity for the deceased to borrow any amount from the appellant. Reference was made to a decree passed in a suit filed against the appellant by the father of Pratap Reddy, and an eviction case filed by them against the appellant.

(3.) Through its judgment dated 13-10-2004, the trial Court decreed the suit. Aggrieved thereby, the respondents filed A.S. No. 6 of 2006 in the Court of Family Judge-cum-Additional District Judge, Kadapa. The lower Appellate Court allowed the appeal through judgment dated 31-08-2009 and reversed the decree passed by the trial Court. Hence, this second appeal.