The main legal point established in the judgment is the significance of admissions and the credibility of witnesses in proving a case, as well as the burden of proof in civil suits.

JUDGMENT

V.Gopala Krishna Rao, J. - The Appeal, under Section 96 of the Code of Civil Procedure [for short 'the C.P.C.'], is filed by the Appellant/Plaintiff challenging the Decree and Judgment, dated 06.09.2007, in O.S. No. 1127 of 2004 passed by the learned III Additional Senior Civil Judge, Vijayawada [for short 'the trial Court']. The Respondent herein is the Defendant in the said Suit.

2. The Appellant/Plaintiff filed the Suit praying for passing of a decree directing the Respondent/Defendant to deposit the Suit amount of Rs.3,90,000/- with costs and subsequent interest @ 24% per annum from the date of Suit till the date fixed by the Court for redeeming the mortgage debt and, on failure to deposit the amount in time, to pass final decree for the suit amount with subsequent contractual interest among other reliefs.

3. Both the parties in the Appeal will be referred to as they are arrayed before the trial Court.

4. The brief averments of the plaint, in O.S. No.1127 of 2004, are as under:

(i) The Defendant borrowed a sum of Rs.2,50,000/- from the Plaintiff on 07.06.2002 by executing a demand promissory note in favour of the Plaintiff on the same day at Vijayawada, promising to repay the same with interest @ 24% per annum either to the Plaintiff or to his order on demand. Subsequently, the Defendant created equitable mortgage of property situated in Kothapeta 1-Town, Vijayawada, vide Document No.1391 of 1996 on 15.06.2002 and deposited title deeds of the said property along with memorandum of deposit of title deeds on 15.06.2002.

(ii) Towards part payment of debt, the Defendant issued a cheque for Rs.75,000/- on 11.10.2004 drawn on the Federal Bank Limited, Governorpet, Vijayawada, and when the cheque was presented with the Plaintiff's banker Vijaya Bank, Governorpet Branch, Vijayawada, the same was dishonoured for 'insufficient funds' in the bank account of the Defendant. Though, the Plaintiff sent notice to the Defendant, no reply was given. Hence, the Suit is filed praying for the reliefs, as stated supra.

5. The brief averments of the written statement, filed by the Defendant, is as under: -

(i) The Defendant while denying the material averments made in the plaint pleaded that the Plaintiff was working as Clerk in Bhagyarekha Finance & Chit Fund Pvt. Ltd, which was maintained by Sri. J.N.Prasad, Sri. K.Srinivas Kumar and Sri. P.Srinivas. All of them fraudulently obtained some documents from the Defendant including five signed blank cheques bearing No.090715, 090716, 090717, 090718, 090720 of Federal Bank Limited, Governorpet, Vijayawada. Thereafter, the aforesaid persons with the aid of the Plaintiff got filed the Suit, which Suit has no cause of action. The Defendant denied executing any equitable mortgage or issuance of any cheque in favour of the Plaintiff. Though, the Defendant got issued reply notice, dated 15.02.2005, to the Plaintiff seeking for return of documents, but without issuing any reply, the Plaintiff filed the Suit on untenable grounds and, accordingly, pleaded to dismiss the Suit with costs.

6. Based on the above pleadings, the trial Court framed the following issues:

(i) Whether the Suit documents are true, valid and binding on defendant?

(ii) Whether the plaintiff is entitled to recover the suit amount from defendant?

(iii) To what relief?

7. During the course of trial in the trial Court, on behalf of the Plaintiff, PW1 to PW3 were examined and Ex.A1 to Ex.A5 were marked. On behalf of the Defendant, DW1 to DW3 were examined and Ex.B1 to Ex.B29 were marked.

8. After completion of the trial and hearing the arguments of both sides, the trial Court dismissed the Suit vide its Judgment, dated 06.09.2007, against which the present appeal is preferred by the Appellant/Plaintiff in the Suit questioning the Decree and Judgment passed by the trial Court.

9. Heard learned Counsel appearing for the Appellant. In-spite of the notice being served on the Respondent on 14.03.2023 and after adjourning the Appeal from time-to-time i.e