High Court Karnataka High Court

Doddapanchegowda vs C K Shantamma on 14 September, 2009

Karnataka High Court
Doddapanchegowda vs C K Shantamma on 14 September, 2009
Author: S.N.Satyanarayana
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT  

DATED TI-IIS THE 14TH DAYWQE sEpfrErvI.I3EIRIé,0<QV9  I' " I 

I3E1«"0IgE  D' _
THE HONBLE Ix/IR.JUs_*IfI_{;E 
;g0D6--  1 '  
BETWEEN  A  I I  I
DDDDAPANCHEGOWDE   I

S/O KENCHEGOWDA ,   ..  

R/0  VILI.IA('IE,  
MANDYA 'I'ALI;I_{;'<.I =  '
MANDYA DIS'I'R[IC'I'I»5

EIEQL
*a'* ..APPELLANT

(Ey at: K A CAIIAIIDRASHEKAR & B.M.SIDDAR'I'H, ADVs)

...__..........-,

* . DCFK 

W/O N TRAJANNA
I/IAQOR IN AGE.
R/GVKERAGODUVILLAGE.

2 " ' MANDYA TALUK,
= ..MANDYA DISTRICT 571 401.

... RESPONDENT

(By Sri P NATARAJ U ASSOCIATES)

THIS RSA IS FILED U/S. 100 OF CPCVAGAINST TI-IE
JUDGEMENT 81 DECREE DATED: 14.6.2006 PASSED IN

W,

R.A.N0.85/2006 ON THE FILE,’ or f”r’I~IE-fy 1i>aESIDINop°*~–.
OFFICER, FAST TRACK coUaT–II, MANDY;AI. V ” ALLowIt\:G T
THE APPEAL AND SETTING ASIDE THE J¥JDGEMENT”AIND ‘

DECREE DATED: 1.2.2005 PASSEIJVIN OS-.T|.\EO.. «.25–5/.2003

ON THE FILE 01+’ THE PRL;c_IV_IL JUDGE (JR.’D.I{.)_,_vMANDYA,.

‘THIS APPEALe_oMI1t’G–eoN””-EQR A’I:>MIsSIoN THIS
DAY, THE COURT DEI,/WEItEI;vTH–EFOLLOWING:

This appeal challenging the
judgIne11t;V.a;I.d.d’eeree.’paSsed—–In. vf§A.No.85/2006, wherein the
judgmehét ‘d:eereea.__:dismissing the suit of piairitlff in

OS.No.dV2ta’–*’I5dd/’dwa’sV.reversed and the suit was decreed for

vptjneiple aI.I1’ount____of Rs.20,000/~ with interest at 10% pa.

~ payable the date of judgment and decree passed in first

H ‘– reatisation of Said amount.

it :2. Essential facts leading to this appeal are that,

V”-adppellant herein is defendant, respondent is plaintiff in

OS.N0.255/2003 on the file of Civit Judge [Jr.I)n), Mandya
initiated for recovery of a sum of RS.32,’700/~ with interest at

2% per month from the date of suit till realisation basing the

‘MI

.3-

claim on ‘on demand promissory note’ and _Tc._oi1sid.eration

receipt’. The defendant denied barrowal

from plaintiff, accepted borrowallffof’Rs.5,0()d[¥btanditstatedbT.

that the entire amount is repaid?’Acc.ording:_to”hi1n,n
is filed seeking recovery of of “filling
the blank pro–not€’ and ;*ot’ne_:r’; documents, wivhich were
executed by him. the contention of

defendant diszifinissecip A”~In.._first;«appea1 the same Was

reversed res.i:ri_ctingwthe___re_lief to an extent of Rs.20,000/–,
i.e., the arnount, with interest at 10% p.a.

from the” date “‘of.”judg1nent in first appellate Court till

” . V V’r’eali’satio:{1. under challenge in this appeal.

Heard the Counsel for parties. Perused the records

of Courts below.

£1. It is seen that the first appellate Court has rightly
accepted the contention of plaintiff regarding lending of
money and on reappreciation of facts, documents and

evidence on record has rightly decreed the suit awarding

ewg

.4.

interest only at 10% p.a. from the date of

decree of suit till realisation. This Court is of the

judgment and decree passed byfthe”firstpappellatei is T. it

well reasoned, based on p:roper”ap’prAeciati’on”of:

evidence on record and does»_n”ot call for int_erfe’:ence in this

appeal.

5. At juiictuie, Cnoiinsel for appellant

a talkvlfor settlement between the
learned ‘-Counsei:.for.._:app-ellant and respondent. Learned

Counselflfoijvvapp’ellant'”‘submits that respondent is ready to

‘receive only prin’c’i’p’le amount ie., Rs.20,000/- and settle the

V between parties. However. counsel for respondent

” ,si1bmi.tso: he has instructions to settle this matter with

prin_ci’p1e amount along with cost of the suit. In the light of

3″ , lsigbmission made by both Counsel regarding settlement, it is

seen that there is no merit in this appeal for admission, for
the reason that, no substantial question of law arises for
consideration in this appeal. Hence, the appeal is required

_g,M

‘\

to be dismissed. At the same __t.im,e, sinéé'”respon«:1’¢n1;a._

agreed to settle the matter urithhtzt1’ir1s’isti11g”~fdr of

entire amount as decreed first appeal, proper
to say that respondent tnlhreceitreH_lRs.2O,0OO/–
along with cost of awarded in the first
appeal at Rs.];,.’7v11/~:,~– it i d it V

judgment and decree
the appeal is dismissed.

he has already deposited a sum
of appeal, he is permitted to deposit

balance decreetal amount of Rs.10,000/– Within 60 days
‘frdm..jt»0da.y, failingwhich he shall be liable to pay interest at

~ -!.Q%._p;.a;«.Qnv balance amount of Rs. 10,000/– from the date of

‘V in first appeal till date of realisation. The
‘respQn.d’elr}tl.is permitted to withdraw Rs.10,000/– which is

already deposit. –

Sd/:3

]’ii”c1§§’