IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 15^TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2021

BEFORE

THE HON’BLE Dr. JUSTICE H.B. PRABHAKARA SASTRY

R.F.A. No.1562 OF 2018

BETWEEN:

1.

Smt. Sowbhagyamma,

W/o. Late Sunder Rao,

Aged about 73 years.

2.

Sri. Kupendra Rao,

S/o. Late Sunder Rao

Aged about 38 years.

3.

Smt. Vatsala,

W/o. Sri Panduranga

Aged about 48 years.

All are residing at

No.525, 9^th Cross,

Banashankari Second Stage,

Jayanagar 7^th Block,

Bengaluru - 560 070.

…Appellants

(By Sri. V.F. Kumbar, Advocate)

AND:

Smt. Prema Venkatesh,

W/o. Sri.K.A. Venkatesh,

R/o. No.1004/5, 3^rd Cross,

"E" Block, Second Stage,

Rajajinagar,

R.F.A.1562/2018

2

Bengaluru - 560 010.

…Respondent

(By Sri. D. Nagaraj, Advocate)

***

This Regular First Appeal is filed under Section 96 of the

Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, praying to call for the record; to set

aside the judgment and decree passed by the learned XXXVIII

Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, at Bangalore City (CCH-

39) in O.S.No.1643/2012 dated 13-06-2018 and consequently

dismiss the suit of the plaintiff/respondent with costs; to pass any

other order/s that this Court deems fit to grant, in the

circumstances of the case, with costs, in the interest of justice and

equity.

This Regular First Appeal having been heard through Physical

Hearing/Video Conferencing Hearing and reserved on 09-12-2021,

coming on for pronouncement of judgment this day, the Court

delivered the following:

J U D G M E N T

This is a defendants' appeal. The present respondent as a

plaintiff had instituted a suit against the present appellants and one

Smt.

Deepika,

arraigning

them

as

defendants

in

O.S.No.1643/2012, in the Court of the XXXVIII Additional City Civil

Judge at Bengaluru City, (hereinafter for brevity referred to as “the

Trial Court”) for recovery of a sum of `13,30,000/-, with interest

there upon from them.

R.F.A.1562/2018

3

2. The summary of the case of the plaintiff in the Trial Court

was that, herself and the defendant No.1 who is the respondent

No.1 herein were known to each other for the last thirty years.

They were also neighbours and knew each other since their

childhood. However, after their marriage, they started living at

different places. In the year 2006, the defendant No.1 approached

the plaintiff for a financial assistance, for putting up a house

construction at Jayanagar. At that time, the plaintiff could not help

her. However, in view of the persistent request made by the

defendant No.1, a sum of `10,00,000/- was paid by the plaintiff to

her on Dt.10-02-2008, as loan. The defendant No.1 had agreed to

repay the said amount along with interest at `2% per month.

Because of their close intimacy, no documents were executed with

respect to the said loan transaction.

It is further the plaint averment that, on 09-04-2009, the

defendant No.1 herself executed an affidavit, acknowledging the

receipt of `10,00,000/-. The defendant Nos.2 to 4 have signed the

said affidavit as consenting witnesses. Through the said affidavit,

the defendant No.1 has acknowledged the debt. The plaintiff has

R.F.A.1562/2018

4

also contended that, the defendants have paid only a sum of

`3,00,000/- towards interest, but not paid any amount towards

principal. This made the plaintiff to issue a legal notice dated

16-11-2011, calling upon the defendants, to pay a sum of

`13,30,000/- towards the principal amount and interest, within four

weeks from the date of receipt of the legal notice. The defendants

replied to the said notice, denying the demand made in the notice.

The plaintiff has stated that this made her to institute a suit

against the defendants in the Trial Court.

3. In response to the suit summons, the defendants appeared

through their counsel and filed their Written Statement, where they

denied the plaint averments. They contended that the plaintiff has

not produced the