1
In the Court of Subordinate Judge, Aruppukottai
Present : Thiru. A.R.V. Ravi, B.A.B.L.,
Subordinate Judge, Aruppukottai.
O.S. No.125 of 2016
Dated on Friday, the 15th Day of March 2019.
Michael Raj .... Plaintiff
/ Vs/
Rakku ... Defendant
This Original Suit came up for final hearing before me on 15.02.2019, in the presence of
Thiru. P. Seenivasan Advocate for the Plaintiff and Thiru. B. Thirupathi, Thiru.A. Muthumani,
Advocates for the Defendant and upon hearing the arguments on both side and upon perusing the
documents, having stood over till date for my considerations, this Court passed the following
JUDGMENT
1. This Original Suit was filed by the Plaintiff with the prayer to pass a Preliminary decree
for Mortgage against the Defendant for a sum of Rs.2,88,229/- with subsequent interest from the
date of Plaint till date of realization for the Principal Amount of Rs.2,31,200/- and on failure to
sell the mortgaged property to adjust the decreed amount and for costs.
2. Facts as per the Plaint are:
i) That the Defendant had borrowed a sum of Rs. 1,70,000/- from the Plaintiff on
12.11 2012.
(ii) That for the above loan, the Defendant had executed a Mortgage Deed in
favor of the Plaintiff on 12.11.2012, itself.
(iii) That the interest amount was fixed as 1.00% per month.
(iv) That the Defendant had not paid either principal or interest.
(v) That meanwhile, the Defendant is trying to sell the property to some 3 rd
Parties.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
OS 125 of 2016
2
(vi) That the Defendant is liable to pay the Principal and the Interest to the
Plaintiff. But the Defendant had not paid the amount even after receiving the
Legal Notice dated 15.05.2014 and 12.12.2014.
(vii) That hence, the suit with the above prayer.
3. After the appearance, Defendant filed his Written Statement.
4. Facts as per the written statement of the Defendant are:
(i) That all the averments in the Plaint are false and all the averments in the
plaint are denied as false.
(ii) That the Defendant came to know the Plaintiff only through one
Saravana Kumar who is having money lending business.
(iii) That the Defendant had borrowed Rs. 50,000/- from Saravana Kumar
and agreed to pay1% interest.
(iv) That the Defendant was compelled to pay 4% for every 10 days and
when the Defendant was not able to pay the interest the Plaintiff had
threatened the Defendant and obtained the Mortgage Deed by increasing the
amount.
(v) That the Defendant is liable to pay only Rs.50,000/- with 1% interest for
which the Defendant is ready to pay the amount.
(vi) That hence the Plaint is to be dismissed.
5. Issues:
On the basis of the Plaint and Written Statement, the following issues were framed:-
1. Whether the Plaintiff is eligible to claim for a sum of Rs.2,88,229/- from
the Defendant or not?
2. Whether the Plaintiff is entitled for the relief of preliminary Decree of
Mortgage in the suit property or not?
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
OS 125 of 2016
3
3. Whether the Plaintiff is entitled for the interest and cost or not?
4. Whether the alleged Mortgage Deed was executed by the Defendant on
compulsion or not?
5. What are the other reliefs the Plaintiff is entitled for?
6. Issue No.1,2,3 and 4:
7. On the side of the Plaintiff, P.W.1, was examined and Ex.A.1 and Ex. A.5 were
marked. On the side of the Defendant, DW.1 was examined and no document was marked. I have
heard the arguments on the side of the Plaintiff and the Defendant and I have perused the
Documents filed.
8. It was argued on the side of the Plaintiff that the Defendant had borrowed a sum of Rs.
1,70,000/- from the Plaintiff on 12.11 2012and for the above loan, the Defendant had executed a
Mortgage Deed in favor of the Plaintiff on 12.11.2012, itself and the interest amount was fixed as
1.00% per month and the Defendant had not paid either principal or interest and meanwhile, the
Defendant is trying to sell the property to some 3rd Parties and the Defendant is liable to pay the
Principal and the Interest to the Plaintiff. But the Defendant had not paid the amount even after
receiving the Legal Notice dated 15.05.2014 and 12.12.2014 and hence, the suit with the above
prayer and prayed to allow the suit.
9. On the side of the Defendant is argued that all the averments in the Plaint are false and
all the averments in the plaint are denied as false and the Defendant came to know the Plaintiff
only through one Saravana Kumar who is having money lending business and the Defendant had
borrowed Rs. 50,000/- from Saravana Kumar and agreed to pay1% interest and the Defendant
was compelled to pay 4% for every 10 days and when the Defendant was not able to pay the
interest the Plaintiff had threatened the Defendant and obtained the Mortgage Deed by increasing
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
OS 125 of 2016
4
the amount and the Defendant is liable to pay only Rs.50,000/- with 1% interest for which the
Defendant is ready to pay the amount and hence the Plaint is to be dismissed.
10. On perusal of records it is found that the Defendant had executed the Mortgage Deed
in favor of the Plaintiff.
11. But as per the case of the Defendant, she had executed the Mortgage Deed only on
compulsion. And it is the further case of the Defendant is that the Defendant is liable to pay only
Rs. 50,000/- with 1% interest.
12. To prove the case of the Plaintiff had produced the Mortgage Deed.
13. To disprove the Plaintiff’s case the Defendant has not adduced any evidence to show
that the Loan Amount was only Rs.50,000/-
14. The Defendant also had not produced any documents to show that the Mortgage Deed
was executed on compulsion.
15. When the Defendant is not able to prove the fact that she had received only
Rs.50,000/- and the Mortgage Deed was executed on compulsion, then the Defendant failed in his
attempt to disprove the case of the Plaintiff, who had proved the case with proper evidence.
16. Hence this Court finds that the Suit is to be allowed as prayed for with cost.
17. Accordingly, the Issues No.1,2,3,4 are answered.
18. Issue No. 5:
19. Since the Issue No.1 to 4 are answered in favor of the Plaintiff, the Plaintiff has no
other relief except the reliefs granted in Issue No.1 to 4.
20. Accordingly, Issue No.5 is answered.
21. As a result, with costs, the Original Suit in O.S.No. 125 of 2016 is allowed and a
Preliminary Decree for Mortgage is passed in favor of the Plaintiff for a sum of Rs.2,88,229/-
with subsequent interest of 8% for the Principal Amount Rs.1,70,000/- from the date of Plaint till
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
OS 125 of 2016
5
the date of Decree and 4% interest from the dated of Decree till realization, failing which the
Plaintiff is entitled to proceed to sale of the Mortgaged property for the Decree amount and the
Defendant is directed to pay the Principal and interest amount within two months.
This Judgment has dictated to the Stenographer directly and the same was typed in the
Computer and after corrections, this Order is pronounced in the Open Court.
This the 15th day of March 2019.
Subordinate Judge,
Aruppukottai.
Witnesses on the side of the Plaintiff:
P.W.1. Thiru. Michael Raj
Documents on the side of the Plaintiff :
Ex.A.1. 12.11.2012 Original Mortgage Deed
Ex.A.2. 08.09.2008 Original Sale Deed No.3020/2008
Ex.A.3. 15.05.2014 Legal Notice
Ex.A.4. 23.05.2014 Deed executed by the Defendant to the Plaintiff
Ex.A.5. 12.12.2014 Legal Notice
Witnesses on the side of the Defendant :
DW.1. Tmt. Rakku
Documents on the side of the Defendant : NIL
Subordinate Judge,
Aruppukottai.
Uploading Orders/Judgment/Deposition : Yes/No
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
OS 125 of 2016
6
Sub Court, Aruppukottai
O.S.No.125 of 2016
Fair/Draft Judgment
Dated: 15.03.2019
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
OS 125 of 2016
