PULIM RAGHUNADHA REDDY Vs. JONNALA SARITHA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Civil Miscellaneous Second Appeal is filed under Sec. 100 of C.P.C. against the judgment and decree dtd. 11/9/2017 dismissing A.S.No.13 of 2014 on the file of the Court of III Additional District Judge, Guntur, filed against the judgment and decree dtd. 8/11/2013 dismissing I.P.No.9 of 2011 on the file of the Court of Senior Civil Judge, Mangalagiri filed under Sec. 9 of the Provincial Insolvency Act, 1920 (hereafter referred as 'the P.I. Act, 1920') to adjudge the respondent No.1 as an insolvent and to annul or cancel the registered sale deed dtd. 22/1/2011 executed by the respondent No.1 in favour of the respondent No.2 in respect of I.P. schedule property.

(2.) The case of the appellant (herein after referred as 'petitioner') is, briefly, as follows: The petitioner agreed to lend an amount of Rs.3,00,000.00 as hand loan at the request of the respondent No.1 and her husband. Accordingly, the petitioner deposited Rs.49,800.00 on 5/1/2008 and Rs.49,500.00 on 17/5/2008 and Rs.48,500.00 on 2/1/2009 in the account of the respondent No.1. Interest payable was fixed at 24% per annum. As the respondent No.1 failed to repay the amount, the petitioner issued legal notice on 5/1/2011. The petitioner also filed O.S.No.13 of 2011 on the file of the Court of IV Additional Senior Civil Judge, Guntur, for recovery of Rs.2,31,843.00. The suit was decreed on 5/6/2013 in favour of the petitioner / plaintiff, with costs, for Rs.2,31,843.00 and interest @ 6% per annum on the principal due of Rs.1,47,800.00 from the date of suit till payment. The respondent No.1 executed a sham and nominal document dtd. 22/1/2011 in favour of the respondent No.2 in respect of the schedule property. Thus, as the respondent No.1 committed the act of insolvency, the said I.P. was filed.

(3.) The respondent No.1 filed counter denying borrowal of money from the petitioner and contending contrarily that the petitioner who is a relative had borrowed money from this respondent and the said amount was repaid by depositing it in the account of this respondent.