5 ХН- స్వీ య చ రి త్ర ము 15, Defendant says that, on that day, Sankaramma in tears came to him complaining that nobody had helped her to try and stop the stone-pelting which was going on even then, and re-iterated her convictions against plaintiff adding that the stones were coming from the Duggirala yard and the upstairs building in which the boat-office of late Chinnaswamy's estate, of which plaintiff is admittedly an executor, was located. Sankaramma, defendant says, then implicated two lads Tirupatirazu and Venkatappayya (of whom the former was an assistant teacher in plaintiff's school) along with Ramabrahmam's son-in-law ; and defendant, yielding to her entreaties to enquire into the matter (and defendant there is no doubt, is a man to whom people with grievances and difficulties in this town do resort for assistance and advice) went first to Duggirala Suryaprakasa Row (2nd defence witness) the owner of the house, attached to Duggirala yard, in which those two lads were living with the 17th defence witness. 16. The Ist defence witness K. Rameswara Row who is Head master of the town branch of the JHigh school under plaintiff was present throughout that interview between Sankaratnma and defendant; and though not professing to remember the whole details of their conversation, he substantially corroborates defendant's testimony as to Sankaramma's statements, adding that he himself was so impressed with the genuineness of her distress that he at once believed her accusations against his own head master the plaintiff. 17. The 2nd defence witness fully corroborates defendant as to what occurred in the course of defendant's enquiries that day at the Duggirala yard, at Ramabrahmam's house and at Chinnaswamy's upstairs. In the yard they found a heap of bricks, and on Ramabrahmam's roof they found pieces of brick of the same kind—one circumstance going to corroborate Sankaramma's complaints. While they were in Ramabrahmam's house, some stones fell on it. She repeated that
