Pothalapala Hari Krishna vs G. Krishnamurthy

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2024 Supreme(AP) 1243

R. RAGHUNANDAN RAO
Pothalapala Hari Krishna – Appellant
Versus
G. Krishnamurthy – Respondent

Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner: C.M.R. Velu.
For the Respondent: Surya Teja Anumolu

ORDER :

(R. Raghunandan Rao, J.)

The respondent herein had filed O.S.No.14 of 2019 before the III Additional District judge, Tirupati for recovery of money, based on a promissory notes, against the petitioner herein.

2. The respondent had marked the said promissory note as Exs.A.1 and A.2. However, the respondent did not examine the attestors to the said promissory notes. The petitioner herein moved I.A.No.13 of 2023 for summoning the second attestor as a witness in his case, and I.A.No.125 of 2023 for reopening the suit for adducing the evidence of proposed witnesses, on the ground that the petitioner, after his examination as a witness in the suit, had come to know, through mediators, that the alleged scribe and attestor had fabricated the suit promissory notes with the active collusion of each other and therefore it is necessary to summon the attestor as a witness.

3. These applications were resisted by the respondent herein on various grounds. The respondent contended that the applications for reopening evidence and summoning the attestor as a witness had been filed after the evidence on both sides had been closed and that the question of reopening of the evidence at the stage of

Click Here to Read the rest of this document