Telangana High Court
K.Sravan Kumar vs Bhaskara Teja Chits And Finance on 6 January, 2023
Bench: P.Sree Sudha
THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE P.SREE SUDHA
APPEAL SUIT No.676 of 2004
JUDGMENT:
This appeal is filed against the Judgment and Decree of
the trial Court in O.S.No.290 of 1999 dated 05.03.2003.
2. The Bhaskarateja Chits & Finance (P) Ltd., filed suit for
recovery of Rs.1,97,400/- with interest and costs from
defendants. The trial Court considering the evidence of both
sides decreed the suit with costs and also interest at the rate of
12% p.a from the date of suit till the date of decree and 6% p.a
from the date of decree till the date of realization and the suit
against defendant No.4 was dismissed without costs. Aggrieved
by the said Judgment, the first defendant in the suit preferred
the present appeal. He mainly contended that there is no
authorization from the appellant/first defendant to adjust
amount of Rs.47,200/- and the total prize amount was not paid
to him. The plaintiff obtained signatures on blank vouchers,
therefore it cannot be said that he accepted for adjustment of
Rs.47,200/-. He also stated that the trial Court observed that
he did not give any notice to the plaintiff Company for payment
of balance prize amount and thus his plea cannot be considered
and it is erroneous. The trial Court has taken adverse inference
and did not consider the plea of the defendant No.1. Therefore,
requested this Court to set aside the Judgment and Decree of
the trial Court in O.S.No.290 of 1999 dated 05.03.2003.
3. The plaintiff Company filed suit for recover of
Rs.1,97,400/- with interest at the rate of 12% p.a. In the written
statement filed by the first defendant, he admitted that he was
the successful bidder in the auction dated 26.10.1997 and he
was the member of the plaintiff Company, but the plaintiff paid
only Rs.62,800/- out of prize amount of Rs.1,10,000/-. He
approached the plaintiff Company several times for balance of
amount, but the plaintiff Company avoided to pay the same.
Even after receiving summons from the Court, he approached
the plaintiff Company and demanded for balance bid amount
with interest, but the plaintiff Company without making any
payment filed false suit against him and other defendants with
high rate of interest.
4. The Recovery Officer of the plaintiff Company was
examined as P.W.1. He stated that the first defendant became a
subscriber of a chit of the plaintiff Company on 29.04.1997
which is valued at Rs.2,00,000/- payable in 50 monthly
instalments at the rate of Rs.4000/- per month and also
executed an agreement of chit under Ex.A1. In the auction
conducted on 26.10.1997, the first defendant became the
successful bidder and agreed to forego Rs.90,000/-. He also
offered guarantors on 04.12.1997. The defendant Nos.2 to 5
executed an agreement of guarantee on 04.12.1997, under
Ex.A2 and also executed a D.P note in favour of plaintiff for
Rs.1,72,000/- towards future liability under Ex.A3. The prize
amount was paid to the first defendant under a Cheque for
Rs.62,800/- and Rs.47,200/- towards adjustment. Ex.A4 is the
cash voucher dated 04.12.1997. The first defendant paid 9
instalments in all and committed default from 11.01.1998. The
plaintiff got issued legal notice on 12.08.1998. Ex.A5 is the
office copy of legal notice. Exs.6 to 8 are postal
acknowledgments of D1, D2 and D4. Exs.A9 and A10 are
returned postal covers of D3 and D5. Ex.A11 is the true extract
of the statement of account. Ex.A12 is the true copy of
authorization letter issued to him for deposing before the Court.
As on the date of filing the suit, defendants has to pay
Rs.1,97,250/- and they claim interest at the rate of 12% p.a. As
the defendants failed to make payment, they filed suit for
recovery of amount.
5. In the cross-examination, he stated that he was working
as a Recovery Officer of the plaintiff Company. He has personal
knowledge about the suit transaction. The first defendant is a
subscriber of two chits in the plaintiff Company. The first
defendant became the successful bidder of another chit valued
at Rs.5,00,000/-. He has no idea whether the first defendant is
also a subscriber of a daily chit for Rs.50,000/-. It was
suggested to him that plaintiff Company did not pay
Rs.40,000/- towards the daily chit though he paid the
instalments for about 400 days. He stated that they paid
Rs.62,800/- by Cheque and Rs.47,200/- by way of adjustment
in respect of the same chit. He also stated that they did not
submit any particulars showing consent of the first defendant
for adjustment and not filed any proof in support of the alleged
adjustment.
6. The first defendant was examined as D.W.1 and admitted
that regarding receipt of Rs.62,800/- through Cheque out of
Rs.1,10,000/-, but denied the adjustment of Rs.47,200/-. He
admitted his signature on Ex.A4 and stated that his signature
was obtained for receiving Rs.1,10,000/-, but paid only
Rs.62,800/- by way of Cheque. He also admitted that after
receiving legal notice from the plaintiff Company, he did not
issue any reply notice and he has not given any notice
demanding the plaintiff Company to pay the balance amount
either before filing of the suit or after filing of the suit. Moreover,
he has not filed counter claim for recovery of Rs.47,200/- from
the plaintiff Company. Exs.A1 to A11 are marked through the
plaintiff and no documents were filed by the defendant.
7. Now, it is for this Court to see whether there are any
errors in appreciation of facts by the trial Court or not.
8. There is no dispute regarding the fact that plaintiff is a
Chit Fund Company and the first defendant is a subscriber of
that Company for an amount of Rs.2,00,000/- and he executed
an agreement of chit on 29.04.1997 and became successful
bidder in the auction which was conducted on 26.10.1997
forgoing Rs.90,000/-. He paid Rs.28,000/- till the payment of
prize amount and his future liability is Rs.1,72,000/-. He
furnished guarantee through defendants 2 to 5 and also
executed a promissory note on 04.12.1997 with collateral
security. The plaintiff Company paid Rs.62,800/- by way of
Cheque and also adjusted Rs.47,200/- by receipt Nos.884 &
885 on the same day and thus they paid Rs.1,10,000/-. The
first defendant disputed the adjustment of amount on the
ground that he never consented for the same. The plaintiff
Company obtained signatures on the blank papers and
vouchers and adjusted the said amount without his knowledge
and he is not liable to pay the suit amount. He admitted his
signatures on Ex.A4, but stated though he signed on the receipt
for Rs.1,10,000/- only an amount of Rs.62,800 was paid to him
by way of Cheque. The trial Court observed that he did not give
reply to the legal notice of plaintiff Company nor gave any legal
notice demanding the balance amount of Rs.47,200/- and not
even filed counter claim after filing of the suit, therefore decreed
the suit with interest and costs.
9. When the first defendant disputed the payment of
Rs.47,200/- to him by way of adjustment, it is for him to raise
an objection at the earliest point of time, but he failed to do so.
Only when the plaintiff Company filed a suit for recovery of
entire amount, he raised the said objection. As such, the trial
Court rightly decreed the suit on appreciation of the entire facts
on record and there is no infirmity or illegality in the Judgment
and Decree of the trial Court and it needs no interference.
In the result, the appeal is dismissed confirming the
Judgment and Decree of the trial Court in O.S.No.290 of 1999
dated 05.03.2003. There shall be no order as to costs.
Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand
closed.
_________________________
JUSTICE P.SREE SUDHA
DATED: 06.01.2023
tri
THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE P.SREE SUDHA
APPEAL SUIT No.676 of 2004
DATED: 06.01.2023
TRI
