మెు ద టి ప్ర కరణ ము 以Fー defendant urged him not to be precipitate in filing the charge, but to discuss the matter first with plaintiff's 11th witness, who was talking about a compromise. 21. On 2nd August, in conseqence of information that stones had again been thrown on Ramabrahmam's house, defendant went there with the Acting Police Inspector (6th defence witness) who after seeing the premises, went away and defedant says that he was talking with his 4th defence witness Venkatramayya near the latter's house, when one T. Nagarazu, an inmate of Ratnabrahmam's house, came up and informed them that he had seen Tirupatirazu (plaintiff's assistant aforesaid) throw stones. The 4th defence witness adds that he then communicated to defendant the results of his own enquiries on Sankaramma's previous complaints to himself, 22. It was while this conversation between defendant and Venkatramayya was going on, and after so much had passed calculated to make defendant believe Sankaramma's implication of plaintiff that plaintiff's 4th witness B. V. Jogayya came up and asked what the conversation was about; and it was then that defendant told this witness his belief that plaintiff had instigated the stone-pelting. It was this, witness who thereupon went and fetched plaintiff to Venkatramayya's (4th defence witness's) house, and the meet ing took place which has already been referred to as that at which hot words ensued. 23. The 4th defence witness says that when Sankaram. ma complained to him of the son-in-law throwing stones and,that she suspected plaintiff of instigating him, he (the witness) told plaintiff at the time of Sankaramma's suspicions against him; and he is positive that when plaintiff at the meeting of 2nd August declared that he was suspected by nobody and that defendant alone was implicating him. he reminded plaintiff of having already told him Sankaramma's suspicions. This the plaintiff denies; but there is
