Karra Arun vs Kapil Chit

Karra Aruna Sundari And 2 Others Vs Kapil Chit Funds Pvt. Ltd., And 5 Others

Case Details

Case Type	AS
Filing Number	5818/2014
Registration Number	33/2015
Filing Date	01-08-2014
Registration Date	18-02-2015

First Hearing Date	25th March 2015
Decision Date	05th January 2017
Case Status	Case Disposed
Court Number and Judge	4-Iii Addl. District And Sessions Judge;
Nature of Disposal	Contested--Dismissed With Costs;

Petitioners & Respondents

Petitioner

Karra Aruna Sundari And Others, ;

Petitioner Advocate

A.A.K.;

Respondent Name

Kapil Chit Funds Pvt. Ltd. And Others;

Order Details

Order not found.

Final Order Judgement

Order Date

05-01-2017

1 Fair IN THE COURT OF THE III ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE:: GUNTUR PRESENT:: SRI G . GOPICHAND, B.Sc., M.A., LL.M., III ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE Thursday, the 5th day of January, 2017. A.S.No.33/2015. Between: 1. Karra Aruna Sundari, W/o Gnana Praksh Rao, Hindu, 51 years, R/o D.No.25-16-104, st. Antony Public School Campus, Chuttugunta, Guntur. (Defendant No.1) 2. Golla Dayavardhana Raju, S/o Abraham, Hindu, 58 years, R/io D.No.7-6-846/14, 5th line, Rajiv Gandhi Nagar, Guntur. (D.2) 3. Nelaturi Gnana Prakash Rao, S/o Murahari Rao, Hindu, 57 years, R/o D.No.25-16-104, St. Antony Public School Campus, Chuttugunta, Guntur. (Defendant No.5) .... Appellants/Defendants. And 1. Kapil Chit Funds Private Limited, Guntur, Rep., by its Recovery Manager, Guntur. (Plaintiff) 2. Kommukuri Aseervadam, S/o Venkatappaiah, Hindu, 55 years, R/o Brahmana Veedhi Madla Mandal,Guntur Dt. (D.3) 3. Chinta Satyavani, W/o Bhupati Raju, Hindu, 39 years, R/o D.No.24-14-32, 3rd line, Nallacheruvu, Guntur. (D.4) 4. Bommini Rama Rao, S/o Koteswara Rao, Hindu, 42 years, R/o D.No.24-14-32, 3rd line, Nallacheruvu, Guntur. (D.6) 5. Etyala Satheesh Kumar, S/o Babu, Hindu, 30 years, Kapil Chit Funds Private Limited, D.No.11-25-135, Beside EMR Hospital, MG Road, Warangal. (D.7) 6. Yedama Kavitha, W/o Srinivasa Rao, Hindu, 27 years, Kapil Chit Funds Private Limited, Zinna Tower Center, Guntur. (D.8) .... Respondents. On Appeal against the Decree and Judgment dated 24-04-2014 passed in O.S.No.267/2010 on the file of Principal Senior Civil Judge, Guntur. Between: Kapil Chit Funds Private Limited, Guntur, Rep., by its Recovery Manager, Guntur. … Plaintiff. And 1. Karra Aruna Sundari, W/o Gnana Praksh Rao, Hindu, 51 years, R/o D.No.25-16-104, st. Antony Public School Campus, Chuttugunta, Guntur. 2 Fair 2. Golla Dayavardhana Raju, S/o Abraham, Hindu, 58 years, R/o D.No.7-6-846/14, 5th line, Rajiv Gandhi Nagar, Guntur. 3. Kommukuri Aseervadam, S/o Venkatappaiah, Hindu, 55 years, R/o Brahmana Veedhi Madla Mandal,Guntur Dt. 4. Chinta Satyavani, W/o Bhupati Raju, Hindu, 39 years, R/o D.No.24-14-32, 3rd line, Nallacheruvu, Guntur. 5. Nelaturi Gnana Prakash Rao, S/o Murahari Rao, Hindu, 57 years, R/o D.No.25-16-104, St. Antony Public School Campus, Chuttugunta, Guntur. 6. Bommini Rama Rao, S/o Koteswara Rao, Hindu, 42 years, R/o D.No.24-14-32, 3rd line, Nallacheruvu, Guntur. 7. Etyala Satheesh Kumar, S/o Babu, Hindu, 30 years, Kapil Chit Funds Private Limited, D.No.11-25-135, Beside EMR Hospital, MG Road, Warangal. 8. Yedama Kavitha, W/o Srinivasa Rao, Hindu, 27 years, Kapil Chit Funds Private Limited, Zinna Tower Center, Guntur. …. Defendants. This appeal suit came up on 20-12-2016 for hearing before me in the presence of Sri A. Ahmed Khan, Advocate for the Appellants and Sri K. Venkata Reddy, Advocate for the Respondent No.1, and the Respondents 2 to 6 remained exparte, and the matter having stood over till this day for consideration, and upon perusing the material available on record, this Court delivered the following: J U D G M E N T This Appeal is filed by the Defendants 1, 2 and 5 in O.S.No.267/2010 on the file of Principal Senior Civil Judge, Guntur challenging the decree and Judgment dated 24-04-2014, whereunder the defendants 1 to 6 therein were directed to pay a sum of Rs.1,27,173/- with subsequent interest and costs. 2} For the sake of convenience, the parties in this appeal are referred to as they are arrayed in O.S.No.267/2010. 3} The brief facts which are leading to the filing of the present appeal are as follows:- (i) The Plaintiff filed the suit in O.S.No.267/2010 before the Principal Senior Civil Judge Court, Guntur for recovery of a sum of Rs.1,27,173/- basing on the chit transaction. 3 Fair (ii) The averments made in the plaint in brief are as follows: The Plaintiff is a chit fund Company and the 1st Defendant joined as a member of the chit scheme bearing No.GRT01J on 15-1-2016 and he was allotted ticket No.3 and the total value of the chit is Rs.5,00,000/- and the same is payable in 50 monthly installments, and in the auction conducted on 25-8-2007 the 1st defendant who became successful bidder has agreed to fore go a sum of Rs.1,71,000/-. Till the payment of the prize amount the 1st defendant paid Rs.2,10,000/- and his future liability is Rs.2,90,000/- and the defendants 2 to 8 stood as guarantors and they jointly executed an agreement of guarantee and promissory note dated 22-12-2007 for a sum of Rs.2,90,000/- in favour of the Plaintiff and that the Plaintiff paid the prize amount in two cheques, and thereafter the 1st defendant paid 17 installments and thereafter committed default in payment of installments in spite of receipt of legal notice dated 15/9/2009 got issued by the Plaintiff. Hence, the suit. 4} The 1st defendant filed written statement which is adopted by the Defendants 2 and 5. The 1st defendant admitted that she joined as a member of the suit chit and she participated in the auction held on 25-8-2007. But she averred that she received only an amount of Rs.1,95,910/- from the Plaintiff towards prize money and the the Plaintiff withheld a sum of Rs.1,33,090/- as security towards future liability and that the 1st defendant paid 38 installments regularly and requested the Plaintiff to adjust the amounts out of the amount withheld by it towards the remaining future installments. The Plaintiff obtained the signatures of the 1st defendant on blank papers. So, the 1st defendant is not liable to pay any amount. The 1st defendant further averred that the Plaint is not signed by the foreman of the Plaintiff Company and the person who signed on the plaint is not competent to sign on the Plaint and that the Court has no jurisdiction to entertain the suit as per the provisions of A.P. Chit Fund Act. 5} The Defendants 3,4 and 6 have remained exparte and the suit against the Defendants 7 and 8 was dismissed 6} Basing on the above pleadings the trial Court framed the following issues: 4 Fair 1. Whether the suit transaction is not supported by the consideration fully ? 2. Whether the 1st defendant discharged the amount by way of adjustment ? 3. Whether the suit is not filed by the competent person ? 4. Whether the 1st defendant is entitled for any dividends but not allowed ? 5. Whether the 1st defendant is not liable to pay interest ? 6. Whether this Court has no jurisdiction 7. To what relief ? 7} Before the trial Court on behalf of the Plaintiff P.W.1 was examined and Exs.A.1 to A.19 were marked. The 1st Defendant examined herself as D.W.1, but no documents were exhibited by the contesting defendants. 8} The trial court after evaluating the oral and documentary evidence placed by both parties passed the impugned judgment dt.24-4-2014 wherein it was held that the Court was having jurisdiction to entertain the suit and the entire prize amount was paid by the Plaintiff to the 1st Defendant and that the 1st defendant agreed for adjustment of some amount and that the 1st defendant is liable to pay the suit amount, and accordingly the trial Court answered all the issues in favour of the Plaintiff and decreed the suit as prayed for. 9} Challenging the impugned decree and judgment the present appeal is filed by the Defendants 1, 2 and 5 contending that, the trial court came to some erroneous conclusion on some assumptions and presumptions and the trial Court ought to have disbelieved the evidence of Plaintiff and the trial Court failed to observe that the admission made by P.W.1 that only part payment was made to the 1st appellant to a tune of Rs.1,95,910/- and remaining amount was withheld, and the trial Court failed to observe that the employees of the Plaintiff Company stood as guarantors and Plaintiff intentionally dropped the proceedings against the said employees. 10} Heard the arguments of the learned counsel for the Appellants and counsel for the 1st Respondent/Plaintiff. 5 Fair 11} Now the points for consideration in this appeal are: 1. Whether the Appellants have established any ground for interfering with the impugned decree and Judgment dated 24-4-2014in O.S.No.267/2010 on the file of Principal Senior Civil Judge, Guntur ? 2. Result of the Appeal ? 12} POINT NO.1:- The undisputed facts of the case are that; The Plaintiff is the Chit Fund Company and the 1st Defendant joined as member of the suit chit and the value of the chit is Rs.5,00,000/- payable in 50 installments. There is also no dispute regarding the fact that the 1st defendant became successful bidder in the auction conducted by the Plaintiff Company on 25-08-2007. There is also no dispute regarding the fact that the 1st defendant paid only 38 installments and she failed to pay the balance installments. 13} The learned counsel for the Appellants argued that, after the 1st Appellant/1st Defendant became successful bidder the Plaintiff paid only an amount of Rs.1,95,910/- and the Plaintiff failed to pay the balance amount of Rs.1,33,090/- and the Plaintiff represented that the said amount of Rs.1,33,090/- will be adjusted towards future installments and if the said adjustment is made by the Plaintiff, there is no liability on the part of the defendants. He further argued that the signatures of the defendants were obtained on blank documents and so in Ex.A.4 the date is mentioned as 5th January, 2006 even though the said document was executed after the 1st defendant became the successful bidder. 14} The learned counsel for the Plaintiff/1st Respondent argued that, the 1st Defendant received the entire bid amount of Rs.3,29,000/- and he signed on Ex.A.5 payment voucher and out of the said amount, an amount of Rs.1,95,910/- was paid under one cheque and an amount of Rs.1,33,090/- was paid under another cheque and that the 1st defendant addressed Ex.A.19 letter to the Plaintiff with a request to adjust an amount of Rs.1,32,340/- which was due to the Plaintiff in respect of other chits subscribed by the 1st defendant and the details of the said adjustment were mentioned in Ex.A.18 which is signed by the 6 Fair 1st defendant and so the entire suit amount is due and the trial Court properly decreed the suit and so there are no merits in this appeal. 15} Before the trial Court the Plaintiff examined one Ch. Vijay Sree Harsha, who is working as Legal Officer in Plaintiff Company as P.W.1 and he filed his affidavit in lieu of his chief-examination reiterating the contents of the Plaint. Exs.A.1 to A.19 are marked on behalf of the Plaintiff. The relevant documents are; Ex.A.2 which is the chit agreement dated 15/1/2006, Ex.A.3 is the Promissory Note dated 22-12-2007. The said promissory note was signed by all the defendants for a sum of Rs.2,90,000/-. Ex.A.4 is the agreement of guarantee executed by all the Defendants. In Ex.A.4 in first page the date is mentioned as 22/12/2007, but some how on the 2nd page a stamp containing date 5-1-2006 was affixed. But it is not the case of the 1st defendant that he furnished the guarantors on 5-1-2006. So, simply because a wrong date is mentioned on chit agreement at Page No.2 the defendants can not contend that the Plaintiff obtained their signatures on blank forms. Ex.A.5 is a cash voucher which is signed by the 1st defendant acknowledging that she received a total amount of Rs.3,29,000/- from the Plaintiff on 22-12-2007. Ex.A.6 is the office copy of legal notice got issued by the Plaintiff to the defendants. Most of the defendants received the said notice as evidenced by Exs.A.7 to A.14, but they failed to issue any reply notice to the Plaintiff. Ex.A.16 is the account copy showing that by the date of filing of the suit the suit amount was due to the Plaintiff. Ex.A.18 is an important document dated 22-12-2007 whereunder the details of the amount due to the Plaintiff Company from the 1st defendant relating to other chits are clearly mentioned and the first defendant signed on the said document. Ex.A.19 is another crucial document dated 22-12-2007 which was addressed by the 1st defendant to the Plaintiff Company stating that she became successful bidder in the auction held on 25-08-2007 in respect of suit chit but she committed delay in furnishing the sureties and she offered to furnish the liquid surety and she permitted the Plaintiff to adjust an amount of Rs.1,32,340/- which was due to the Plaintiff in respect of other chits relating to the 1st defendant. Even though P.W.1 is cross-examined nothing is elicited in order to discredit his testimony. 7 Fair 16} The 1st defendant examined herself as D.W.1 and she filed her affidavit in lieu of her chief-examination reiterating the contents of the written statement filed by her. 17} As per the documents filed by the Plaintiff it is very clear that the 1st defendant was member of some other chits in the Plaintiff Company and so she agreed for the adjustment of the amount due to the Plaintiff Company by the 1st defendant. But if really there was any understanding between the Plaintiff and 1st defendant to the effect that some amount which was allegedly withheld by the Plaintiff will be adjusted towards the future installments payable by the first defendant, there was no need to the 1st defendant to pay the installments immediately after the auction conducted by the Plaintiff. The 1st defendant participated in the auction after paying 21 installments, and thereafter also she regularly paid the installments up to 38th installment. So, if really the said amount of Rs.1,33,090/- was withheld by the Plaintiff towards future installments there was no need for the first defendant to pay the installments up to 38th installment. So, the conduct of the 1st defendant in paying the installments up to 38th installment makes very clear that there was no such understanding between the Plaintiff and 1st defendant to the effect that the amount allegedly withheld by the Plaintiff would be adjusted in future installments payable by the 1st defendant in the suit chit. More over as per Exs.A.18 and A.19 it is very clear that the 1 st defendant authorized the Plaintiff to adjust the amount due by her in respect of other chits out of the prize amount payable to her in the suit chit. If really, the contention of the 1st defendant is true, she is expected to issue a prompt reply immediately after receiving the legal notice got issued by the Plaintiff, but she did not issue any such reply notice. The other objections taken by the 1st defendant in her written statement to the effect that this Court is having no jurisdiction and that she is not liable to pay any interest all are over ruled by the trial Court and the same are not agitated by the counsel for the Appellants during the course of hearing in this appeal. 18} So, considering all the circumstances, I am of the opinion that the defendants are liable to pay the suit amount. So, the trial Court has rightly decreed the suit. So, there is no need to interfere with the impugned decree and Judgment passed by the trial Court and the impugned decree and judgment is 8 Fair sustainable. So, this point is answered in favour of the 1st Respondent/ Plaintiff and against the Appellants. 19} POINT NO.2:- IN THE RESULT, the Appeal is dismissed with costs confirming the decree and Judgment dated 24-04-2014 in O.S.No.267/2010 on the file of Principal Senior Civil Judge, Guntur. Dictated to the Personal Assistant, transcribed by him, corrected by me and pronounced in open court this the 5th day of January, 2017. III ADDL. DISTRICT JUDGE GUNTUR. APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE No oral or documentary evidence was adduced on either side. III ADJ Copy to: The Principal Senior Civil Judge, Guntur.

Similar Cases

Frequently Asked Questions

The Petitioner in case Karra Aruna Sundari And 2 Others vs Kapil Chit Funds Pvt. Ltd., And 5 Others is Karra Aruna Sundari And 2 Others.

The Respondent in case Karra Aruna Sundari And 2 Others vs Kapil Chit Funds Pvt. Ltd., And 5 Others is Kapil Chit Funds Pvt. Ltd., And 5 Others.

The case against Kapil Chit Funds Pvt. Ltd., And 5 Otherswas filed on 01-08-2014 by Karra Aruna Sundari And 2 Others.

The status of case Karra Aruna Sundari And 2 Others against Kapil Chit Funds Pvt. Ltd., And 5 Others is Case Disposed.