Allowed

U.Satyanarayana v. Sri Ram Chit Funds Pvt.Ltd.

Telangana HC9 Apr 2013AS/66/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Single Judge allowed an appeal in a chit fund recovery suit, setting aside the lower court decree. The court found that crucial issues regarding suit maintainability and competency were not answered. The matter was remanded for reframing issues, hearing evidence, and deciding on merits.

What did the court decide?

Appeal allowed; judgment of Court below set-aside; suit remanded to Court below to frame issues, restore suit for evidence production, and proceed to trial.

U.Satyanarayana Vs Sri Ram Chit Funds… — Contract and Commercial Disputes | Telangana HC (2013)

¶1

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE N.R.L. NAGESWARA RAO

¶2

APPEAL SUIT No.66 OF 2012

¶3

JUDGMENT:

¶4

The 1^st defendant in O.S. No.554 of 2007 on the file of the Court of the III Additional Senior Civil Judge (Fast Track Court), Warangal, is the appellant herein.

¶5

2. The suit was filed for recovery of a sum of Rs.3,73,068/- alleging that the first defendant is a subscriber in the chit run by the plaintiff company and became the highest bidder and was paid a sum of Rs.2,75,000/- on the guarantee of defendants 2 to 5 and all of them executed necessary documents. Subsequently the 1^st defendant became defaulter and in spite of repeated demands, he failed to pay the amount. Hence the suit.

¶6

3. The 1^st defendant filed a written statement denying some of the allegations made in the plaint. According to him, he paid the instalments regularly, but the plaintiff did not account for the same, as such the suit claim is not correct. It was also pleaded that the person, who filed the suit, is not competent. The 2^nd defendant also denied the

¶7

execution of the document, which was also the same stand taken by defendants 4 and 5.

¶8

4. On the basis of the above pleadings, only two issues were framed for trial which are as follows:

¶9

“1. Whether the defendant Nos.2, 4 and 5 stood as guarantors for the future liability of defendant No.1 in favour of the plaintiff?

¶10

2. Whether the plaintiff is entitle to recover the suit claim?

¶11

3. To what relief?”

¶12

5. After considering the evidence of PW1 and as the defendants did not choose to lead any evidence, the evidence was closed and the Court below has decreed the suit as prayed for. Aggrieved by the said judgment, the present appeal is filed.

¶13

5. The points that arise for consideration are: 1. Whether the judgment passed by the Court below is

¶14

legal?

¶15

2. Whether the defendants are not liable to pay the suit

¶16

amount?

¶17

POINTS:

¶18

6. The learned counsel for appellant contends that though several pleas were taken, the Court below has not framed necessary issues and an issue with regard to the maintainability of the suit and also the competency of the person who filed the suit and gave the evidence is disputed, the Court below did not answer the same. Further more, the 1^st defendant has taken a specific plea that the amounts were paid under several instalments and that was also not taken into consideration. According to the learned counsel for the defendants, the defendants could not adduce evidence as the appellant, on the date of the evidence and other dates, could not present. In fact, the Court below has closed the evidence without giving proper opportunity.

¶19

8. As can be seen from the record, the judgment of the Court below, as rightly contended, necessary issues that have been raised by the appellant are not properly answered. In fact, the explanation given by the 1^st appellant for non-appearance on 30.08.2011 for not producing the evidence appears to be reasonable. As can be seen from the material on record, there is some trivial issues which have co-bearing on the nature of the

¶20

suit.

¶21

9. Therefore, in view of the above circumstances, the judgment of the Court below is set-aside and the matter is remanded to the Court below. The appellant is directed to deposit Rs.1,50,000/- within a period of six (6) weeks and on such deposit, the plaintiff is permitted to withdraw the same and thereafter the Court shall restore the suit to file and frame necessary issues and proceed with the trial of the suit by giving opportunity to both the parties for producing the evidence.

¶22

Accordingly, the appeal is allowed. No costs.

¶23

Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this appeal shall stand closed.

¶24

_______________________________ JUSTICE N.R.L. NAGESWARA RAO

¶25

Date: 09.04.2013 Knl/inl

U.Satyanarayana v. Sri Ram Chit Funds Pvt.Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

U.Satyanarayana v. Sri Ram Chit Funds Pvt.Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Pabisetty Sreerangaiah Setty ( Died ) Vs Pabisetti Nagaraju Gupta

Smt.a.Manemma Vs B.Krishna Murthy

Smt. P.Kusuma, Vs S. Hanumantha Rao

Chintam Koteswara Rao Vs Grandi Venkata Ratna Mahalakshmi

T.Raju, Vs Mr. Balakrishna

Kedamal Vs The Joint Collector