Ms. Amishi Jajiyan

O.S. No. 1370 OF 2024

IN THE COURT OF THE XIX JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE, CITY CIVIL COURT

HYDERABAD.

PRESENT : SMT. AMISHI JAJIYAN

XIX Junior Civil Judge,

City Civil Court, Hyderabad

Thursday, dated this the 13 th day of February, 2025

Original Suit No. 1370 of 2024

Between :

1.M. Mounika, D/o Late Sri.M. Vijaya Bhasker Reddy, Aged about 33 years, Occ : , R/o 17-1-391/43, Flat No. 203, Subramanyam Nagar, Saidabad, Hyderabad, TS – 500 059.

2.M. Gowtham Kumar Reddy, S/o Late Sri.M. Vijaya Bhasker Reddy, Aged about 36 years, Occ : , Permanent R/o 17-1-391/43, Flat No. 203, Subramanyam Nagar, Saidabad, Hyderabad, TS.

Presently staying at abroad

Represented by his sister and GPA Holder, M. Mounika, D/o Late Sri.M. Vijaya Bhasker Reddy, Aged about 33 years, Occ : , R/o 17- 1-391/43, Flat No. 203, Subramanyam Nagar, Saidabad, Hyderabad, TS – 500 059.

... Plaintiffs

A N D

1. The Tahsildar, Saidabad Mandal, Saidabad, Hyderabad.

2.The Tahsildar, Hayathnagar Mandal, Hayathnagar, R.R. District.

3.All Concerned.

… Defendants

This suit is coming before me on 04.12.2024 for final hearing in the presence of Sri.A. Veeresh, learned advocate for the plaintiffs and defendants were set exparte and the matter having stood over for consideration to this day, this court delivered the following.

2 os. No. 1370 OF 2024

J U D G M E N T

1.This suit is filed for declaration, to declare that plaintiffs no.1 and 2 as the surviving legal heirs and successors of Late Smt. Mallela Lakshmi, W/o

Sri.M. Vijaya Bhasker Reddy, who died intestate on 05.03.2019 in respect of

Suit Schedule ‘A’ to ‘C’ Properties.

Brief averments of the plaint :-

2.The plaintiffs submitted that father of plaintiffs, namely Sri.M. Vijaya

Bhasker Reddy, S/o Late M. Satyanarayana Reddy died intestate on 04.03.2004 at Secunderabad Nursing Home, Secunderabad and thereafter, mother of plaintiffs, namely Smt. Mallela Lakshmi also died intestate on 05.03.2019 at Omega Hospital, Banjara Hills, Hyderabad. Further submits that plaintiff no.1, namely Smt.M. Mounika is the daughter of deceased Late

Smt. Mallela Lakshmi, W/o Sri.M. Vijaya Bhasker Reddy and plaintiff no.2, namely Sri. M. Gowtham Kumar Reddy is the son of deceased Late Smt.

Mallela Lakshmi W/o Sri.M. Vijaya Bhasker Reddy. Further submits that plaintiff no.1 is the daughter and plaintiff no.2 is the son of the deceased

Late Smt. Mallela Lakshmi, who died intestate on 05.03.2019 leaving behind the plaintiffs as the legal heirs and successors to her entire estate. Further submits that except plaintiffs, there are no other legal heirs of deceased Late

Smt. Mallela Lakshmi, W/o Sri.M. Vijaya Bhasker Reddy.

3 os. No. 1370 OF 2024

3. Further submits that during her lifetime, mother of plaintiffs, namely

Late Smt. Mallela Lakshmi purchased immovable properties i.e., (1.)

Semifinished flat no. 203, 2nd floor with a plinth area of 983 Sq.feet (including common areas) with an undivided share of land admeasuring 34 Sq.yards equivalent to 28.423 Sq.metres out of 401 Sq.yards, residential complex ‘Sree

Maa Residency’, house no. 17-1-391/43, on plot no. 43, survey nos.184, 185, 188, 189 and 191 part, ward no. 17, block no.1, situated at Sree Maa

Residency, subramanyam nagar, Saidabad, Hyderabad having purchased from Sri. Anutosh vide Registered Sale Deed Document No. 489 of 2006

Dated 02.02.2006 (hereinafter to be referred as Suit Schedule ‘A’ Property)

(2.) Open land bearing plot nos. 8 & 7, south part, under GHMC, Hyderabad admeasuring 319 Sq.yards, equivalent to 266.72 Sq.meters in survey nos.

256/B, situated at Kammaguda, H/o Turkayamjal Village, Hayathnagar

Revenue Mandal, R.R. District vide Registered Sale Deed Document No.

12468 of 2013 Dated 11.07.2013 registered at DRO., Hyderabad East from

Sri. Pochetti James (hereinafter to be referred as Suit Schedule ‘B’ Property) (3.) Open land bearing bearing plot no. 1598, admeasuring 200 Sq.yards equivalent to 167.22 Sq.meters, in survey no. 354, situated at Torrur Village,

Hayathnagar Revenue Mandal, R.R. District, Hayathnagar Revenue Mandal,

R.R. District vide registered Sale Deed Document No. 7513 of 2013 Dated 07.08.2013 from Sri.N. Subba Rama Raju registered at SRO, Vanasthalipuram,

4 os. No. 1370 OF 2024

Hyderabad (hereinafter to be referred as ‘Suit Schedule ‘C’ Property) and from the respective date of purchases, mother of plaintiffs, namely Smt.

Mallela Lakshmi was in peaceful possession and enjoyment of above mentioned Suit Schedule A to C Properties as absolute owner without any let or hindrance from any quarter. Further states that after expiry of Late Smt.

Mallela Lakshmi, plaintiffs herein became the owners and are in possession of the above mentioned Suit Schedule Properties as joint owners.

4.It is further submitted that on 02.02.2023, plaintiffs approached

Tahsildar, Saidabad Mandal and Tahsildar, Hayathnagar Mandal i.e., defendants no.1 and 2 with an application for issuance of legal heirs certificate as they recently came to know that for mutation, alienation/sale/transfer and for lien over the Suit Schedule Properties, they require their legal status as despite of being the owners and only surviving legal heirs of their deceased mother, namely Smt. Mallela Lakshmi, they are unable to enjoy the said Schedule Properties. But defendants no.1 and 2 refused to issue the legal heirs certificate expressing their inability as the deceased Late Smt. Mallela Lakshmi was a housewife by profession and they are issuing Legal Heirs/Family Members Certificates only to the deceased

Government Employees and further advised the plaintiffs to approach the

Competent Civil Court by filing a suit for declaration of legal heirs. Therefore,

5 os. No. 1370 OF 2024

in the above circumstances, the plaintiffs having left with no other alternative except to approach the Hon’ble Court filed the suit for declaration of legal heirs and for declaration that the plaintiffs as the owners and successors of the Suit Schedule ‘A to C’ Properties, in the interest of justice and equity. Hence the present suit is filed.

5. After registering the suit, summons were served to defendants no.1 and 2. No representation was made by defendants no.1 and 2. Summons on defendant no.3 i.e., General public was served through publication in daily newspaper ‘Yudha Bhoomi’ and report filed on 16.10.2024 to invite objections from the public at large but none appeared denying the plaintiffs case or claiming as legal heirs of deceased Late Smt. Mallela

Lakshmi. Hence, D1 and D2 were set exparte vide order dated 22.08.2024 and D3 vide order dated 16.10.2024 to the suit proceedings.

6.At the time of trial, plaintiff no.1 got examined herself as PW1 and got marked exhibits Ex.A1 to Ex.A11.

7. Final Arguments were advanced by Learned Counsel for plaintiffs which was duly considered with evidence on record and the matter was posted for Judgment.

8. Now the points for determination are :-

1. “Whether the plaintiffs are entitled to be declared as legal heirs of

6 os. No. 1370 OF 2024

deceased Late Smt. Mallela Lakshmi, W/o Sri.M. Vijaya Bhasker Reddy,

who died on 05.03.2019 as prayed for ?”

2. “Whether the plaintiffs are entitled to the relief of declaration

as owners and successors of Suit Schedule ‘A’ to ‘C’ Properties being

the legal heirs of deceased Late Smt. Mallela Lakshmi as prayed

for ?”

3. To what relief ?

9. ISSUE NO. 1 : - It is the contention of the plaintiffs that they are the only legal heirs of the deceased. The evidence of PW1 is replica of plaint averments. Hence the same is not reproduced here to avoid repetition of facts.

10.This is a suit filed by the plaintiffs praying to declare them as legal heirs of deceased Late Smt. Mallela Lakshmi, W/o Sri.M. Vijaya Bhasker

Reddy, who died on 05.03.2019. The plaintiff no.1 got examined herself as PW1. Through PW1, Exs.A1 to A11 are marked. From the material on record i.e., the original death certificates, i.e., Ex.A7 and Ex.A8, it stands proved that deceased Late Sri.M. Vijaya Bhasker Reddy and Late Smt.

Mallela Lakshmi died on 04.03.2004 and 05.03.2019 respectively. Ex.A1 is the certified copy of sale deed document no. 489 of 2006 of Suit

Schedule ‘A’ Property. Ex.A2 is the certified copy of sale deed document

7 os. No. 1370 OF 2024

no. 12468 of 2013 of Suit Schedule ‘B’ Property. Ex.A3 is the certified copy of Suit Schedule ‘C’ Property. Ex.A4 is the market value certificate of Suit

Schedule ‘A’ Property dated 16.08.2023. Ex.A5 is the market value certificate of Suit Schedule ‘B’ Property dated 17.08.2023. Ex.A6 is the market value certificate of Suit Schedule ‘C’ Property dated 16.08.2023.

Ex.A9 is the original aadhaar card of plaintiff no.1 bearing no. 6538 8049 9610. Ex.A10 is the original aadhaar card of plaintiff no.2 bearing no.

3458 5772 1212. Ex.A11 is the GPA executed by plaintiff no.2 in favour of plaintiff no.1.

11.On perusal of Ex.A8, it stands proved that deceased Late Smt.

Mallela Lakshmi and deceased Late Sri.M. Vijaya Bhasker Reddy are wife and husband. From Ex.A9, it stands proved that plaintiff no.1, namely

Smt.M. Mounika is the daughter of the deceased Late Smt. Mallela

Lakshmi, W/o Sri.M. Vijaya Bhasker Reddy. From Ex.A10, it stands proved that plaintiff no.2, namely Sri.M. Gowtham Kumar Reddy is the son of the deceased Late Smt. Mallela Lakshmi, W/o Sri.M. Vijaya Bhasker Reddy.

12. ISSUE NO.2 : The next relief which is sought for by the plaintiffs is relief of declaration to the effect that “being the legal heirs, they are the owners and successors of deceased Late Smt. Mallela Lakshmi, W/o

Sri.M. Vijaya Bhasker Reddy, relating to the Suit Schedule ‘A’ to ‘C’

8 os. No. 1370 OF 2024

Properties”. The question now is whether the plaintiffs being legal heirs of deceased are entitled to be declared as successors in respect of the Schedule Properties. In this connection, it is pertinent to refer to

Section 34 of the Specific Relief Act, which is extracted hereunder:

Section 34. Discretion of court as to declaration of

status or right : Any person entitled to any legal character, or to any right as to any property, may institute a suit against any person denying, or interested to deny, his title to such character or right, and the court may in its discretion make therein a declaration that he is so entitled, and the plaintiff need not in such suit ask for any further relief:

Provided that no court shall make any such declaration where the plaintiff, being able to seek further relief than a mere declaration of title, omits to do so.

Explanation- A trustee of property is a “ person interested to deny” a title adverse to the title of someone who is not in existence, and for whom, if in existence, he would be a trustee.

13.A plain reading of Section 34 makes it abundantly clear that any person who is entitled to any legal character or to any right with respect to any property may institute a suit against any person who is denying his title to such character or right by seeking the relief of declaration of his title. Thus, in order to seek the relief of declaration of title by a person, he must plead and prove that his title to the property has been challenged or denied by the opposite party (defendant) in the

9 os. No. 1370 OF 2024

suit. The cause of action for filing the suit for declaration of title arises only when the defendant denies the title of the plaintiffs and thus plaintiffs are entitled to file a suit for declaration only on the basis of such cause of action. In the present case, the plaintiffs are seeking declaration as legal heirs/owners/successors of deceased Late Smt.

Mallela Lakshmi, W/o Sri.M. Vijaya Bhasker Reddy in respect of Suit

Schedule Properties.

14.In the instant case, the plaintiffs are totally silent about any such denial of title/right/legal character of the plaintiffs by the defendants or any other person. In the plaint, there is no specific averment to the effect that the defendants or their henchmen or any other person claiming through them challenged the title of the plaintiffs. From the said circumstances, it cannot be said by any stretch of imagination that defendants are interested to deny the title of the plaintiffs. In the absence of any specific pleading or any iota of evidence showing that the title of the plaintiffs was denied either by the defendants or by any other persons claiming through them, the relief sought for by plaintiffs seeking to declare them as being legal heirs of deceased Late Smt.

Mallela Lakshmi, W/o Sri.M. Vijaya Bhasker Reddy as successors in respect of the Suit Schedule A to C Properties, is not maintainable in law

10 os. No. 1370 OF 2024

and therefore, this court is not inclined to grant the same.

15.For the above reason, this court is inclined to grant only the prayer for declaration of the legal status of the plaintiffs as they are the legal heirs of Late Smt. Mallela Lakshmi, W/o Late Sri.M. Vijaya Bhasker

Reddy.

16.Hence, from the material on record, it can be safely concluded that plaintiff no.1 is the daughter and plaintiff no.2 is the son of the deceased

Late Smt. Mallela Lakshmi, W/o Sri.M. Vijaya Bhasker Reddy and the oral evidence of PW1 and Exs.A1 to A11 together establishes the relationship of plaintiffs and the deceased person. Therefore, the plaintiffs being the legal heirs of deceased Late Smt. Mallela Lakshmi, W/o Sri.M. Vijaya

Bhasker Reddy are entitled for declaration as sought for. The point is answered accordingly.

17.IN THE RESULT, the suit of the plaintiffs is partly decreed without costs, declaring plaintiffs no.1 and 2 as the legal heirs of the deceased

Late Smt. Mallela Lakshmi, W/o Sri.M. Vijaya Bhasker Reddy and this declaration is only for legal heirs status but not for any other purpose.

Typed to my dictation, corrected and pronounced by me in open court on this the 13th day of February, 2025.

11 os. No. 1370 OF 2024

XIX JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE,

CITY CIVIL COURT,

HYDERABAD.

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

WITNESS EXAMINED

PLAINTIFFS DEFENDANTS

PW1Smt.M. Mounika- Nil -

DOCUMENTS MARKED

PLAINTIFFS DEFENDANTS

Ex.A1Certified Copy of Sale Deed Document No. 489 of 2006 of Suit Schedule ‘A’ Property.

Ex.A2Certified Copy of Sale Deed Document No. 12468 of 2013 of 2006 of Suit Schedule ‘B’ Property.

Ex.A3Certified Copy of Sale Deed Document No. 7513 of 2013 of 2006 of Suit Schedule ‘C’ Property.

Ex.A4Original Market Value Certificate of Suit Schedule ‘A’ Property Dated 16.08.2023. - Nil - Ex.A5Original Market Value Certificate of Suit Schedule ‘B’ Property Dated 17.08.2023.

Ex.A6Original Market Value Certificate of Suit Schedule ‘C’ Property Dated 16.08.2023.

Ex.A7Original Death Certificate of Deceased Late Sri.M. Vijaya Bhasker Reddy, who died on 04.03.2004.

Ex.A8Original Death Certificate of Deceased Late Smt. Mallela Lakshmi, who died on 05.03.2019.

12 os. No. 1370 OF 2024

Ex.A9Original Aadhaar Card of Plaintiff No.1 bearing No. 6538 8049 9610.

Ex.A10Original Aadhaar Card of Plaintiff No.2 bearing No. 3458 5772 1212.

Ex.A11GPA executed by Plaintiff No.2 in favour of Plaintiff No.1.

XIX JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE,

CITY CIVIL COURT, HYDERABAD.

O.S. No. 1692 OF 2024

IN THE COURT OF THE XIX JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE, CITY CIVIL COURT

HYDERABAD.

PRESENT : SMT. AMISHI JAJIYAN

XIX Junior Civil Judge,

City Civil Court, Hyderabad

Monday, dated this the 10 th day of February, 2025

Original Suit No. 1692 of 2024 Between :

1.Gujjula Chandrasekhar Reddy, S/o Late Raja Reddy,Aged about 64 years, R/o 2-2-23/41/1, D.D. Colony, Near Andhra Bank, Bagh Amberpet, Hyderabad.

At present residing at 116 Bramble Dr, Morganville NJ 0775. Represented by his GPA Holder, Sri. Pothula Naresh, S/o Pothula Bhadraiah, Aged about 31 years, R/o 3-6-136, Street No. 17, Himayath Nagar, Hyderabad.

2.Smt. Vijaya Reddy, W/o Rama Krishna Reddy, Aged about 74 years, R/o 2-2-23/41/1, D.D. Colony, Near Andhra Bank, Bagh Amberpet, Hyderabad.

At present residing at 247 Tiber Place, Staten Island, New York NY 10301. Represented by his GPA Holder, Sri. Pothula Naresh, S/o Pothula Bhadraiah, Aged about 31 years, R/o 3-6-136, Street No. 17, Himayath Nagar, Hyderabad.

3.Smt. Byreddy Shashi Rekha, W/o Dasharath Reddy, D/o Late Raja Reddy, Aged about 76 years, Occ : Household, R/o 6-2-233, Subashnagar, Nizamabad.

4.Smt. Narasarapally Sunanda, W/o Gana Reddy, D/o Late Gujjula Raja Reddy, Aged about 62 years, Occ : Household, R/o 2-2-23/22/C/5, D.D. Colony, Hyderabad.

5.Smt. Gujjula Sangeetha Reddy, W/o Late Jagan Mohan Reddy, Aged about 59 years, R/o 2-2-23/41/1, D.D. Colony, Near Andhra Bank, Bagh Amberpet, Hyderabad.

2 OS NO. 1692 OF 2024

6.Gujjula Vishruth Reddy, S/o Late Jagan Mohan Reddy, Aged about 35 years, R/o 2-2-23/41/1, D.D. Colony, Near Andhra Bank, Bagh Amberpet, Hyderabad.

Represented by his GPA Holder, Sri. Pothula Naresh, S/o Pothula Bhadraiah, Aged about 31 years, R/o 3-6-136, Street No. 17, Himayath Nagar, Hyderabad.

7.Gujjula Tarun Reddy, S/o Late Jagan Mohan Reddy, Aged about 31 years, R/o 2-2-23/41/1, D.D. Colony, Near Andhra Bank, Bagh Amberpet, Hyderabad.

At present residing at 5472 Riverside Station Blvd, Secaucus, N.J. 07094. Represented by his GPA Holder, Sri. Pothula Naresh, S/o Pothula Bhadraiah, Aged about 31 years, R/o 3-6-136, Street No. 17, Himayath Nagar, Hyderabad. 7.

... Plaintiffs

A N D

1. The Tahsildar, Amberpet Mandal, Hyderabad.

2. All Concerned.

… Defendants

This suit is coming before me on 10.01.2025 for final hearing in the presence of Sri.Y. Krishna Mohan Rao, learned advocate for the plaintiffs and defendants were set exparte and the matter having stood over for consideration to this day, this court delivered the following.

J U D G M E N T

1.This suit is filed for declaration, to declare that plaintiffs no.1 to 4 as the legal heirs Late Sri. Gujjula Raja Reddy, S/o Sri. Gujjula Narasimha Reddy,

3 OS NO. 1692 OF 2024

who died on 01.04.2020.

Brief averments of the plaint :-

2.The plaintiffs submitted that deceased Late Sri. Gujjula Raja Reddy had two sons, namely Sri. Gujjula Chandrasekhar Reddy (plaintiff no.1 herein) and Sri. Jagan Mohan Reddy and three daughters, namely Smt. Vijaya Reddy (plaintiff no.2 herein), Smt. Shashirekha Reddy (plaintiff no.3 herein) and

Smt. Sunanda (plaintiff no.4 herein). Further submits that during his lifetime,

Late Sri. Gujjula Raja Reddy performed the marriages of his sons and daughters. It is further submitted that Sri. Jagan Mohan Reddy, S/o Late Sri.

Gujjula Raja Reddy also died on 04.08.1996 leaving behind his wife, namely

Smt. Gujjula Sangeetha Reddy (plaintiff no. 5 herein) and two sons, namely

Sri. Gujjula Vishruth Reddy (plaintiff no.6 herein) and Sri. Gujjula Tarun Reddy (plaintiff no.7 herein) as his legal heirs and successors to his entire estate and have joined the present suit being the legal heirs of Late Sri. Gujjula Raja

Reddy.

3.It is further stated that plaintiff no.1, namely Sri. Gujjula

Chandrasekhar Reddy is the son of deceased Late Sri. Gujjula Raja Reddy, plaintiffs no.2 to 4, namely Smt. Vijaya Reddy, Smt. Byreddy Shashi Rekha and Smt. Narasarapally Sunanda are the daughters of the deceased Late Sri.

Gujjula Raja Reddy, plaintiff no.5, namely Smt. Gujjula Sangeetha Reddy is

4 OS NO. 1692 OF 2024

the daughter in law of deceased Late Sri. Gujjula Raja Reddy and plaintiffs no.6 and 7, namely Sri. Gujjula Vishruth Reddy and Sri. Gujjula Tarun Reddy are the grandsons of deceased Late Sri. Gujjula Raja Reddy. Further submits that plaintiff no.1 is the son, plaintiffs no.2 to 4 are the daughters, plaintiff no.5 is the daughter in law and plaintiffs no. 6 and 7 are the grandsons of deceased Late Sri. Gujjula Raja Reddy, S/o Gujjula Narasimha Reddy, who died on 01.04.2020 leaving behind the plaintiffs herein as his legal heirs and successors to his entire estate. Further submits that except plaintiffs, there are no other legal heirs of deceased Late Sri. Gujjula Raja Reddy, S/o Gujjula

Narasimha Reddy.

4.Further states that in the second week of January, 2024, plaintiffs approached The Tahsildar, Amberpet Mandal i.e., defendant no.1 for issuance of legal heirs certificate/family members certificate in order to have legal status. But defendant no.1 refused to issue the said certificates duly stating that he is not Competent Authority to do so and further advised the plaintiffs to approach the Competent Civil Court for obtaining Decree, declaring the plaintiffs herein as the legal heirs of deceased Late Sri. Gujjula

Raja Reddy, S/o Gujjula Narasimha Reddy. Therefore in the above circumstances, the plaintiffs having left with no other alternative except to approach the Hon’ble Court filed the suit for declaration of legal heirs. Hence

5 OS NO. 1692 OF 2024

the present suit is filed.

5. After registering the suit, summons on defendant no.1 served.

Defendant no.1 called absent. No representation made on behalf of defendant no.1. Summons to defendant no.2 i.e., General Public was served through publication in daily newspaper ‘Nava Telangana’ and report filed on 10.07.2024, to invite objections from the public at large but none appeared denying the plaintiffs case or claiming as legal heirs of deceased

Late Sri. Gujjula Raja Reddy, S/o Gujjula Narasimha Reddy. Hence, D1 and

D2 were set exparte vide order dated 12.09.2024 and 10.07.2024 respectively to the suit proceedings.

6.At the time of trial, plaintiff no.4 got examined herself as PW1 and got marked exhibits Ex.A1 to Ex.A7.

7. Final Arguments were advanced by Learned Counsel for plaintiffs which was duly considered with evidence on record and the matter was posted for Judgment.

8. Now the points for determination are :-

1. “Whether the plaintiffs are entitled to be declared as legal

heirs of deceased Late Sri. Gujjula Raja Reddy, S/o Gujjula Narasimha

Reddy, who died on 01.04.2020 as prayed for ?”

6 OS NO. 1692 OF 2024

2. To what relief ?

9. POINT : - It is the contention of the plaintiffs that they are the only legal heirs of the deceased. The evidence of PW1 is replica of plaint averments. Hence the same is not reproduced here to avoid repetition of facts.

10.This is a suit filed by the plaintiffs praying to declare them as legal heirs of deceased Late Sri. Gujjula Raja Reddy, S/o Gujjula Narasimha

Reddy, who died on 01.04.2020.The plaintiff no.4 got examined herself as PW1. Through PW1, Exs.A1 to A7 are marked. From the material on record i.e., the original death certificates i.e., Ex.A1 and Ex.A2, it stands proved that deceased Late Sri. Gujjula Raja Reddy and Late Sri. Jagan

Mohan Reddy died on 01.04.2020 and 04.08.1996 respectively. Ex.A3 are the original aadhaar cards of plaintiffs no. 1to 7 (7 in nos). Ex.A4 is the original GPA’s. Ex.A5 is the original PAN card of plaintiff no.2 showing father’s name. Ex.A6 is the original PAN card of plaintiff no.3 showing father’s name. Ex.A7 is the original PAN card of plaintiff no.4 showing father’s name.

11.On perusal of Ex.A3, it stands proved that plaintiff no.1, namely Sri.

Gujjula Chandrasekhar Reddy is the son of deceased Late Sri. Gujjula

Raja Reddy. From Ex.A5, Ex.A6 and Ex.A7, it stands proved that plaintiffs

7 OS NO. 1692 OF 2024

no.2 to 4, namely Smt. Vijaya Reddy, Smt. Byreddy Shashi Rekha and Smt.

Narasarapally Sunanda are the daughters of the deceased Late Sri.

Gujjula Raja Reddy. Through Ex.A3, it stands proved that plaintiff no.5, namely Smt. Gujjula Sangeetha Reddy is the daughter in law of deceased

Late Sri. Gujjula Raja Reddy and wife of Late Sri. Jagan Mohan Reddy and plaintiffs no.6 and 7, namely Sri. Gujjula Vishruth Reddy and Sri. Gujjula

Tarun Reddy are the grandsons of deceased Late Sri. Gujjula Raja Reddy and sons of Late Sri. Jagan Mohan Reddy.

12.Hence, from the material on record, it can be safely concluded that plaintiff no.1 is the son, plaintiffs no.2 to 4 are the daughters, plaintiff no.5 is the daughter in law and plaintiffs no.6 and 7 are the grand sons of deceased Late Sri. Gujjula Raja Reddy, S/o Gujjula Narasimha Reddy and the oral evidence of PW1 and Exs.A1 to A7 together establishes the relationship of plaintiffs and the deceased person. Therefore, the plaintiffs being the legal heirs of deceased Late Sri. Gujjula Raja Reddy,

S/o Gujjula Narasimha Reddy are entitled for declaration as sought for.

The point is answered accordingly.

13.IN THE RESULT, the suit of the plaintiffs is decreed without costs, declaring plaintiffs no.1 to 7 as the legal heirs of the deceased Late Sri.

Gujjula Raja Reddy, S/o Gujjula Narasimha Reddy and this declaration is

8 OS NO. 1692 OF 2024

only for legal heirs status but not for any other purpose.

Typed to my dictation, corrected and pronounced by me in open court on this the 10th day of February, 2025.

XIX JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE,

CITY CIVIL COURT,

HYDERABAD.

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

WITNESS EXAMINED

PLAINTIFFS DEFENDANTS

PW1Smt. Narasarapally Sunanda - Nil -

DOCUMENTS MARKED

PLAINTIFFS DEFENDANTS

Ex.A1Original Death Certificate of Deceased Late Sri. Gujjula Raja Reddy, S/o Gujjula Narasimha Reddy, who died on 01.04.2020.

Ex.A2Original Death Certificate of Deceased Late Sri. Gujjula Jagan Mohan Reddy, S/o Gujjula Raja Reddy, who died on 04.08.1996.

Ex.A3Original Aadhaar Cards of Plaintiffs No.2 to 7 (7 in Nos). - Nil - Ex.A4Original GPA’s.

Ex.A5Original PAN Card of Plaintiff No.2, showing the Father’s Name.

Ex.A6Original PAN Card of Plaintiff No.3, showing the Father’s Name.

Ex.A7Original PAN Card of Plaintiff No.4, showing

9 OS NO. 1692 OF 2024

the Father’s Name.

XIX JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE,

CITY CIVIL COURT, HYDERABAD.

OS NO. 3608 OF 2023

IN THE COURT OF THE XIX JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE, CITY CIVIL COURT AT :

HYDERABAD

TUESDAY, THIS THE 11 TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2025

Present : Smt. Amishi Jajiyan

XIX Junior Civil Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad.

O.S.NO. 3608 OF 2023

Between : Dudyala Srikanth, S/o Diudyala Srihari, Aged about 38 years, Occ : Business, R/o H.No. 2-1-434/3/17, Nallakunta, Morram Quary, Amberpet, Hyderabad.

…. Plaintiff AND

1. G. Yadaiah, S/o Not Known to Plaintiff, Aged about Major, Occ : Business.

2. G. Raghu, S/o Not Known to Plaintiff, Aged about Major, Occ : Business.

Both are R/o H.No. 16-9-198/4/A, Shankar Nagar, Old Malakpet, Hyderabad.

…Defendants

This suit is coming before me for final hearing on 18.10.2024 in the presence of M/s. Maydha Srinivas, the learned Counsel for the Plaintiff and Defendants called absent and were set exparte and the matter having stood over for consideration till this day, this Court delivered following :-

J U D G M E N T

The suit is filed under Order VII Rule 1 & 2 R/w Section 151 of CPC, praying the Hon’ble Court to pass Judgment and Decree for Perpetual Injunction in favour of plaintiff and against defendants, thereby restraining the defendants and their henchmen or any other person or persons from interfering with the peaceful possession of the plaintiff over the suit schedule property with costs of

OS NO. 3608 OF 2023

suit, in the interest of justice.

Brief facts of the plaint are thus:-

2. The plaintiff submitted that he is absolute owner and possessor of house bearing No. 16-9-100/11/A vide (PTIN No. 1065527017) on Plot No. 14, admeasuring 54.16 Sq.yards or equivalent to 45.28 Sq.metrers, Situated at

Shanker Nagar, Old Malakpet, Hyderabad (hereinafter to be referred as ‘Suit

Schedule Property’) vide Gift Settlement Deed Document No. 1251/2023 Dated 16.02.2023 registered at SRO, Azampura duly executed by wife of plaintiff, namely Smt.M. Jyothi and since then, the plaintiff and his predecessors are in continuous possession of suit schedule property without any hindrance. Further submits that originally Smt.M. Sakkubai was the absolute owner and possessor of suit property having purchased the same from its previous owner, Sri.G.

Satyanarayana and others vide Notarized Agreement of Sale Dated 10.10.1994 and thereafter, got mutated her name in the Municipal Records and paid the electricity charges regularly and was in possession of said property from the last 28 years without any interruption till her demise. Further submits that after death of Smt.M. Sakkubai, wife of plaintiff herein, namely Smt.M. Jyothi succeeded the suit property on 23.11.2022.

3.It is further submitted that being defendant no.1, the brother and defendant no.2, the son in law of Late Smt.M. Sakkubai never used to take care of her during her lifetime inspite of several requests made by Smt.M. Jyothi, who is wife of plaintiff herein to help in getting Smt.M. Sakkubai hospitalized for better treatment and infact, when Smt.M. Sakkubai fell sick, defendants evaded wife of plaintiff and Late Smt.M. Sakkubai. It is further stated that after the

OS NO. 3608 OF 2023

demise of Smt.M. Sakkubai, defendants herein suddenly interfered into the peaceful possession of the plaintiff over the suit property with an intention to grab the property and are regularly harassing the plaintiff and his wife, Smt.M.

Jyothi mentally and physically and are pressurizing them to sign on the blank non-judicial stamp papers and further warned the plaintiff and his wife to leave the property by handing over all the necessary documents and on failing, defendants would eliminate the plaintiff and his wife, if they don’t leave the property.

4.It is further stated that on 05.07.2023, without having any right, title or interest, defendants herein tried to interfere with the peaceful possession of the plaintiff over the suit schedule property to dispossess the plaintiff in furtherance of which plaintiff with the help of well wishers was able to restrain the defendants and their henchmen from interfering into the suit schedule property. Thereafter, defendants left suit property duly threatening the plaintiff with dire consequences stating that they would visit again with more force to dispossess the plaintiff from the suit schedule property. Further states that as defendants herein are highly influential persons, there is a threat to suit property as they are making hectic efforts to dispossess the plaintiff and if the defendants succeed in their illegal attempts, it would cause irreparable loss and injury to the plaintiff. Therefore, having left no other alternative except to approach the Hon’ble Court file the present suit seeking appropriate remedy.

Further states to have made out prima facie case and balance of convenience in their favour and if the defendants are allowed to interfere with the peaceful possession of plaintiff, irreparable loss would be caused. Hence, the present

OS NO. 3608 OF 2023

suit is filed seeking the relief of Perpetual Injunction.

5.Summons to defendants no.1 and 2 returned unserved as ‘Unclaimed’.

Hence, service of summons to defendants no.1 and 2 deemed to be served.

Defendants called absent. No representation made on behalf of defendants.

Hence, D1 and D2 were set exparte vide order dated 04.03.2024 to suit proceedings.

6.During enquiry, plaintiff got examined himself as PW1 and got marked

Ex.A1 to Ex.A5. Smt.M. Jyothi (plaintiff’s wife) got examined herself as PW2. No documents were marked on behalf of PW2. Plaintiff counsel present and reported no further evidence. Hence, the evidence of plaintiff closed vide order

dated 09.07.2024.

7.Heard learned counsel for plaintiff.

8.Perused the material placed on record carefully.

9. Now point for consideration :

1. “Whether the plaintiff is entitled to the relief seeking

Judgment and Decree for Perpetual Injunction in favour of plaintiff and

against defendants, thereby restraining the defendants and their

henchmen or any other person or persons from interfering with the

peaceful possession of the plaintiff over the suit schedule property

with costs of suit as prayed for ?”

2. To what relief ?

10.Plaintiff got himself examined as PW1 and in his chief in examination reiterated the contents of the Plaint. Smt.M. Jyothi, wife of plaintiff got examined herself as PW2 and no documents were marked on her behalf. On

OS NO. 3608 OF 2023

behalf of PW1, Ex.A1 to Ex.A5 are marked. Ex.A1 is the Certified Copy of Gift

Deed Document No. 1251 of 2023 Dated 16.02.2023 clearly shows that Smt.M.

Jyothi, W/o Sri. Dudyala Srikanth (plaintiff herein) as ‘Donor’ and Sri. Dudyala

Srikanth, S/o Dudyala Srihari (plaintiff herein) as the ‘Donee’ in respect of house property bearing Municipal No. 16-9-100/11/A (PTIN No. 1065527017), on Plot No. 14, Admeasuring 54.16 Sq.yards or equivalent to 45.28 Sq.meters,

Situated at Shankar Nagar, Old Malakpet, Hyderabad, Telangana State i.e., suit schedule property herein. Ex.A2 is the Original Death Certificate of Smt.M.

Sakkubai Dated 07.12.2022 issued by GHMC, Malakpet Circle. Ex.A3 is the

Original Death Certificate of Sri.M. Krishna Dated 16.07.2014 issued by GHMC

Malakpet Circle. Ex.A2 and Ex.A3 shows that deceased Late Smt.M. Sakkbai and Sri.M. Krishna are wife and husband and have died on 23.11.2022 and 06.08.2012 respectively. Ex.A4 is the Original Electricity Bill in the name of Sri.

Dudyala Srikanth (plaintiff herein) issued by TSSPDCL in respect of suit schedule property. Ex.A5 is the Original Encumberance Statement No.

155660404 issued by SRO, Azampura clearly showing Sri. Dudayala Srikanth (plaintiff herein) as the ‘Donee’ and Smt.M. Jyothi as the ‘Donee’ vide

Registered Gift Settlement Document No. 1251 of 2023 Registered at SRO,

Azampura, Hyderabad in respect of suit schedule property.

11.The evidence of PW1 and Exs.A1 to A5 proves the contention of the plaintiff and the possession of plaintiff over the suit property. Moreover, the defendants remained exparte in the present suit and did not choose to challenge the case of the plaintiff. Therefore, in the absence of any contrary material placed on record by the defendants and the perusal of documents

OS NO. 3608 OF 2023

placed under Ex.A1 to Ex.A5, this court is of the opinion that the present suit is liable to be decreed. Point is answered in favour of plaintiff. Hence, Plaintiff is entitled for perpetual injunction as prayed for.

12.In the result, the suit of plaintiff is decreed by granting Perpetual

Injunction against the Defendants or any other person or persons claiming through him from interfering with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the Plaint Schedule Premises or dispossessing the Plaintiff from the Schedule

Pr`emises without following due process of law. In view of circumstances of the case, no costs.

Typed to my dictation, corrected and pronounced by me in the open Court on this the 11th day of February, 2025.

XIX JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE,

CITY CIVIL COURTS:HYDERABAD.

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

WITNESSES EXAMINED

FOR PLAINTIFF : FOR DEFENDANTS :

PW1 : Sri. Dudyala Srikanth None PW2 : Smt.M. Jyothi None

DOCUMENTS MARKED FOR PLAINTIFF :

Ex.A1 is the Certified Copy of Gift Deed Document No. 1251 of 2023 Dated 16.02.2023.

Ex.A2 is the Original Death Certificate of Smt.M. Sakkubai Dated 07.12.2022 issued by GHMC, Malakpet Circle.

Ex.A3 is the Original Death Certificate of Sri.M. Krishna Dated 16.07.2014 issued by GHMC Malakpet Circle.

OS NO. 3608 OF 2023

Ex.A4 is the Original Electricity Bill in the name of Sri. Dudyala Srikanth (plaintiff herein).

Ex.A5 is the Original Encumberance Statement No. 155660404 issued by SRO,

Azampura.

DOCUMENTS MARKED FOR DEFENDANTS : -Nil-

XIX JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE,

CITY CIVIL COURTS:HYDERABAD.

 IN THE COURT OF THE XIX JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE, CITY CIVIL COURT

HYDERABAD

MONDAY THIS THE 9TH DAY OF MAY, 2022

 PRESENT : MS. AMISHI JAJIYAN, 

XIX JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE

OS.No.3530 of 2021

Between:

1. Vilas Ausekar, S/o. Late. Govind Rao, Age 61 years, Occ: Self Employed, Religion: Hindu, R/o. 16­11­19/6/1/2 and 3, Flat No.06, Vijet Farahat Nursing Home Lane, Malakpet, Hyderabad­500036.

2. Vinay Ausekar, S/o. Vilas Ausekar, Age 31 years, Occ: Doctor, Religion: Hindu, R/o. 16­11­19/6/1/2 and 3, Flat No.06, Vijet Farahat Nursing Home Lane, Malakpet, Hyderabad­500036. 

...Plaintiffs

A N D

1. The Tahasildar (MRO), Office of the Tahsildar and Executive Magistrate, Police Colony, Amberpet, Hyderabad, Telangana­500013, Hyderabad ­ 500013.

2. To all the Concerned …Defendants

This suit is coming before me for final hearing in the presence of Sri Nikhil Khadkikar, Advocate for the Plaintiffs and defendants remained exparte and the matter having stood over for consideration till this day, this Court delivered following:­

J U D G M E N T

1.This is a suit for Declaration to declare the plaintiffs as the Legal heirs of the deceased late Madhuri Ausekar who died on 09­09­2020 and consequently declare the plaintiffs No.1 and 2 as the owners of the suit schedule property.

2 O.S.NO.3530 of 2021

The brief averments of the plaint are as follows :

2.The plaintiffs submit that Plaintiff No.1 is the husband of Late Madhuri

Ausekar and that plaintiff No.1 got married to the deceased on 09­07­1989.

Late Madhuri Ausekar who was a secondary school teacher died on 09­09­2020 leaving the plaintiffs as her legal heirs. The plaintiff No.1 is the husband of the deceased and Plaintiff No.2 is their only son and hence they jointly fall under the category class 1 legal heirs as per the section 3(1) of the Hindu Succession

Act and are entitled to succeed to the property of the deceased which was jointly owned by her along with the plaintiff No.1.

3.Plaintiff further submits that the deceased along with plaintiffs were residing at their permanent residence located at Flat No.306, H.No.16­11­ 19/6/1, 2, 3, 3/1 & 4 , Vijeta Millenium, Gafoor Bagh, Saleem Nagar Colony,

Farahat Nursing Home Lane, Malakpet, Hyderabad­500036, Telangana. They are by nationality citizens of India and Hindu by Religion. It is further submitted that the deceased and plaintiff No.1 had jointly acquired the suit schedule property bearing No. Flat No.306, H.No.16­11­19/6/1, 2, 3, 3/1 & 4 ,

Vijeta Millenium, Gafoor Bagh, Saleem Nagar Colony, Farahat Nursing Home

Lane, Malakpet, Hyderabad­500036, Telangana. 

4. Plaintiffs further submits that the plaintiff No.1 and the deceased had jointly purchased undivided share to an extent of 25 Sq. Yards out of 1000

Sq.yards in the open land on which the suit schedule property is now situated by executing a registered sale deed bearing doc. No.553 of 2001 which was

3 O.S.NO.3530 of 2021

prior to commencement of the construction of the said residential complex where in the suit schedule property is located. It is submitted that for the purpose of construction of the suit schedule property the plaintiff No.1 and deceased had entered into a separate “Agreement of construction of Flat” dated 20­02­2021 bearing doc No.559 of 2001 duly registered with office of Sub­

Registrar at Azampura, Hyderabad with the developer. Upon completion of the construction the plaintiffs and the deceased were inducted into possession in the year 2002 by the developer and since then they were residing in the said suit schedule property being lawful owners by virtue of above two deeds.

5.Plaintiffs further submits that the deceased being the joint/co­owner by virtue of the registered sale deed and agreement of construction was entitled to half share in the suit schedule property and remaining half belonged to plaintiff No.1. As the plaintiff died intestate the plaintiffs are now entitled to succeed to the half share in the suit schedule property of which the deceased was entitled to. Hence the plaintiffs approached the concerned Mandal Office,

Amberpet i.e., Defendant No.1 for issuance of legal heir certificate, but defendant No.1 refused to issue the same. Having no other alternative the plaintiff filed the present suit.

6.Summons were served on defendant No.1 and Paper Publication was ordered in respect of defendant No.2. Defendant No.1 failed to appear before the Court and no objections were received from any person in respect of defendant No.2 and hence both were set exparte to the suit proceedings.

4 O.S.NO.3530 of 2021

7.During enquiry, plaintiff No.1 got himself examined as PW1 and got marked Ex.A1 and Ex.A9 documents in support of their claim.

8.Heard the counsel for the plaintiff and perused the material on record.

Now the point for consideration is whether the Plaintiffs are entitled to

be declared as the legal heirs of Late Smt.Madhuri Ausekar as prayed for?

POINT:

9.As stated above, the plaintiffs filed the present suit for declaration to declare them as the legal heirs of the deceased Late Smt. Madhuri Ausekar.

This court carefully appreciated the evidence of plaintiffs along with documentary evidence Ex. A1 to Ex. A9. Plaintiff no. 1 namely Sri Vilas Ausekar got examined as Pw1 and got marked documents Ex. A1 to Ex. A9. Ex. A1 is the original Death certificate of deceased Late Smt. Madhuri Ausekar. Ex. A2 is the original marriage invitation card of plaintiff No.1 namley Vilas Ausekar. Ex. A3 is the Aadhar card of plaintiff no.1 namely Vilas Ausekar. Ex. A4 is the Aadhar card of plaintiff No.2 namely Vinay Ausekar. Ex. A5 is the Aadhar card of the deceased Late Madhuri Ausekar. Ex. A6 is the certified copy of sale deed bearing Doc No. 553 of 2001 of schedule property. Ex A7 is the certified copy of Agreement of construction of Flat bearing document No. 559 of 2001 of schedule of property. Ex. A8 is the certified copy of Encumbrance certificate of schedule property. Ex. A9 is the certified copy of market value certificate of schedule property. Ex. A1 is the Death Certificate of Late Smt. Madhuri Ausekar which shows that Madhuri Ausekar died on 09­09­2020. The said document

5 O.S.NO.3530 of 2021

further shows that Vilas Ausekar, who is plaintiff no.1 herein is the husband of

Late Madhuri Ausekar. Ex.A5 which is the Aadhar card of Madhuri Ausekar also shows that Vilas Ausekar is the husband of Late Madhuri Ausekar. Ex A3 is

Aadhar card of plaintiff No.1 namely Vilas Ausekar. Therefore, from Ex. A1 to

A3 and Ex. A5, it can be seen that the deceased is the wife of Plaintiff no.1 namely Vilas Ausekar . Ex. A4 shows that plaintiff no.2 namely Vinay Ausekar is the son of the deceased Late Smt. Madhuri Ausekar and Plaintiff no.1. Since the

Defendants remained exparte, the evidence of Pw1 on oath remained unchallenged. Further Ex. A1 to Ex. A5 shows that the plaintiffs are the legal heirs of Late Smt. Madhuri Ausekar. Therefore,this court is inclined to grant relief sought by plaintiffs and declare them as legal heirs of Smt. Madhuri

Ausekar.

 10.In the result, the suit is hereby decreed partly without costs, declaring the plaintiffs as the legal heirs of the deceased Late Smt. Madhuri Ausekar only for the purpose for legal heir status. 

Typed to my dictation by the personal assistant, corrected and

pronounced by me in the open Court on this the 9th day of May, 2022.

XIX JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE

CITY CIVIL COURT, HYDERABAD

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

WITNESSES EXAMINED

For Plaintiff: For Defendants:

PW1 : Vilas Ausekar (Plaintiff No.1) ­ Nil­

6 O.S.NO.3530 of 2021

Documents marked on behalf of Plaintiff :

Ex.A1:Original Death Certificate of Late Madhuri Ausekar (deceased ) Issued by GHMC.

Ex.A2 :Original marriage invitation Card of Plaintiff No.1

Ex.A3:Aadhar Card of Plaintiff No.1

Ex.A4:Aadhar Card of Plaintiff No.2

Ex.A5:Aadhar Card of the deceased

Ex.A6:Certified copy of Sale deed bearing Doc No.553 of 2001 of Schedule property

Ex.A7:Certified copy of Agreement of construction of Flat bearing Doc. No.559 of 2001 of Schedule of property

Ex.A8:Certified copy of Encumbrance Certificate of Schedule property

Ex.A9:Certified copy of Market Value Certificate of Schedule property.

Documents marked on behalf of Defendants: 

­NIL­

XIX JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE

CITY CIVIL COURT, HYDERABAD

O.S. No.5587 OF 2024

IN THE COURT OF THE XIX JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE, CITY CIVIL COURT

HYDERABAD.

PRESENT : SMT. AMISHI JAJIYAN

XIX Junior Civil Judge,

City Civil Court, Hyderabad

Thursday, dated this the 13 th day of February, 2025

Original Suit No. 5587 of 2024 Between :

1.Gousiya Begum, W/o Late Mohammed Ali, Aged about 55 years, Occ : Household.

2.Md. Javed Ali, S/o Late Mohammed Ali, Aged about 36 years, Occ : Business.

3.Md. Asif Ali, S/o Late Mohammed Ali, Aged about 35 years, Occ : Business.

4.Mohammed Sajeed Ali, S/o Late Mohammed Ali, Aged about 34 years, Occ : Legal Practitioner.

5.Md. Abid Ali, S/o Late Mohammed Ali, Aged about 32 years, Occ : Business.

6.Ayesha Begum, D/o Mohammed Ali, Aged about 30 years, Occ : Household.

All are R/o H.No. 16-9-748/12/A, Near Water Tank, Old Malakpet, Hyderabad.

... Plaintiffs

A N D

1. The MRO, Amberpet Mandal, O/o Amberpet, Opposite to Tirumala Hotel, Hyderabad – 500 013, TS.

2. All Concerned.

… Defendants

2 OS NO. 5587 OF 2024

This suit is coming before me on 24.01.2025 for final hearing in the presence of M/s. Syed Ashfaq Ahmed, & Mohammed Riyazath Ali, learned advocate for the plaintiffs and defendants were set exparte and the matter having stood over for consideration to this day, this court delivered the following.

J U D G M E N T

1.This suit is filed for declaration, to declare that plaintiffs no.1 to 4 as the legal heirs of Late Sri. Mohammed Ali, S/o Jabbar Hussain, who died on 03.03.2023.

Brief averments of the plaint :-

2.The plaintiffs submitted that plaintiff no.1, namely Gousiya Begum is the wife of deceased Late Sri. Mohammed Ali, plaintiffs no.2 to 5, namely Sri.

Md. Javed Ali, Sri. Md. Asif Ali, Sri. Mohammed Sajeed Ali and Sri. Md. Abid Ali are the sons of the deceased Late Sri. Mohammed Ali and plaintiff no.6, namely Smt. Ayesha Begum is the daughter of the deceased Late Sri.

Mohammed Ali. Further submits that plaintiff no.1 is the wife, plaintiffs no.2 to 5 are the sons and plaintiff no.6 is the daughter of the deceased Late Sri.

Mohammed Ali, S/o Jabbar Hussain, who died on 03.03.2023 leaving behind the plaintiffs herein as his legal heirs and successors to his entire estate.

Further submits that except plaintiffs, there are no other legal heirs of deceased Late Sri. Mohammed Ali. Further states that during his lifetime, the

3 OS NO. 5587 OF 2024

deceased Late Sri. Mohammed Ali obtained Passport bearing No. T4826063 on 24.06.2019 issued by Regional Passport Office, Hyderabad and the same is valid till 23.06.2019 and states to have filed copy of said passport for kind perusal of the Hon’ble Court.

3.Further states that on 21.06.2024, plaintiffs approached MRO,

Amberpet Mandal i.e., defendant no.1 for issuance of legal heirs certificate for the purpose of obtaining Widow Pension for plaintiff no.1 and also for the purpose of other future prospects, daily requirements/necessities before the concerned authorities. But, on 22.07.2024, defendant no.1 refused to issue said certificate duly stating that the legal heirs certificate would be issued only to Government Servants and further directed the plaintiffs to obtain the Declaratory Decree from the Competent Court of Law. Therefore in the above circumstances, the plaintiffs having left with no other alternative except to approach the Hon’ble Court filed the suit for declaration of legal heirs. Hence the present suit is filed.

4. After registering the suit, summons on defendant no.1 served.

Defendant no.1 called absent. No representation made on behalf of defendant no.1. Summons to defendant no.2 i.e., General Public was served through publication in daily newspaper ‘Saz-E-Deccan’ and report filed on 06.01.2025, to invite objections from the public at large but none

4 OS NO. 5587 OF 2024

appeared denying the plaintiffs case or claiming as legal heirs of deceased

Late Sri. Mohammed Ali, S/o Jabbar Hussain. Hence, D1 and D2 were set exparte vide order dated 06.01.2025 to the suit proceedings.

5.At the time of trial, plaintiff no.1 got examined herself as PW1 and got marked exhibits Ex.A1 to Ex.A3.

6. Final Arguments were advanced by Learned Counsel for plaintiffs which was duly considered with evidence on record and the matter was posted for Judgment.

7. Now the points for determination are :-

1. “Whether the plaintiffs are entitled to be declared as legal

heirs of deceased Late Sri. Mohammed Ali, S/o Jabbar Hussain, who died

on 03.03.2023 as prayed for ?”

2. To what relief ?

8. POINT : - It is the contention of the plaintiffs that they are the only legal heirs of the deceased. The evidence of PW1 is replica of plaint averments. Hence the same is not reproduced here to avoid repetition of facts.

9.This is a suit filed by the plaintiffs praying to declare them as legal heirs of deceased Late Sri. Mohammed Ali, S/o Jabbar Hussain, who died

5 OS NO. 5587 OF 2024

on 03.03.2023.The plaintiff no.1 got examined herself as PW1. Through

PW1, Exs.A1 to A3 are marked. From the material on record i.e., the original death certificate i.e., Ex.A2, it stands proved that deceased Late

Sri. Mohammed Ali, S/o Jabbar Hussain died on 03.03.2023. Ex.A1 are the original aadhaar cards of plaintiffs no.1 to 6 (6 in Nos). Ex.A3 is the copy of passport of deceased Late Sri. Mohammed Ali, S/o Jabbar Hussain (compared with original).

10.On perusal of Exs.A1 to A3, it stands proved that plaintiff no.1, namely Smt. Gousiya Begum and deceased Late Sri. Mohammed Ali are wife and husband. From Ex.A1, it stands proved that plaintiffs no.2 to 5, namely Sri. Md. Javed Ali, Sri. Md. Asif Ali, Sri. Mohammed Sajeed Ali and

Sri. Md. Abid Ali are the sons and plaintiff no.6, namely Smt. Ayesha

Begum is the daughter of the deceased Late Sri. Mohammed Ali, S/o

Jabbar Hussain.

11.Hence, from the material on record, it can be safely concluded that plaintiff no.1 is the wife and plaintiffs no.2 to 6 are the children of deceased Late Sri. Mohammed Ali, S/o Jabbar Hussain and the oral evidence of PW1 and Exs.A1 to A3 together establishes the relationship of plaintiffs and the deceased person. Therefore, the plaintiffs being the legal heirs of deceased Late Sri. Mohammed Ali, S/o Jabbar Hussain are

6 OS NO. 5587 OF 2024

entitled for declaration as sought for. The point is answered accordingly.

12.IN THE RESULT, the suit of the plaintiffs is decreed without costs, declaring plaintiffs no.1 to 6 as the legal heirs of the deceased Late Sri.

Mohammed Ali, S/o Jabbar Hussain and this declaration is only for legal heirs status but not for any other purpose.

Typed to my dictation, corrected and pronounced by me in open court on this the 13th day of February, 2025.

XIX JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE,

CITY CIVIL COURT,

HYDERABAD.

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

WITNESS EXAMINED

PLAINTIFFS DEFENDANTS

PW1Smt. Gousiya Begum- Nil -

DOCUMENTS MARKED

PLAINTIFFS DEFENDANTS

Ex.A1Original Aadhaar Cards of Plaintiffs No. 1 to 6 (6 in Nos).

Ex.A2Original Death Certificate of Deceased Late - Nil - Sri. Mohammed Ali, S/o Late Jabbar Hussain.

Ex.A3Copy of Passport of Deceased Late Sri. Mohammed Ali, S/o Late Jabbar Hussain (Compared with Original).

XIX JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE,

7 OS NO. 5587 OF 2024

CITY CIVIL COURT, HYDERABAD.