Sri. Ankit Sarwa

III Additional Junior Civil Judge-cum-XXV Addl Judicial Magistrate of First Class RangaReddy District at Rajendrangar

Rajendra Nagar, ADJ Court Complex · Rangareddy · Telangana

Sri. Ankit Sarwa, III Additional Junior Civil Judge-cum-XXV Addl Judicial Magistrate of First Class RangaReddy District at Rajendrangar, is posted at Rajendra Nagar, ADJ Court Complex, Rangareddy, Telangana, India. 326 court orders on record since 2023. 5 judgments with full text available. Primarily handles CC, OS, STC cases.

326

Total Orders

Judgments

Orders/Month

Postings

Featured Judgments

CC/300742/2017 Acquitted

PS NARSINGI vs MUNAWAR KHAN

11 Apr 2025

1 CC. No. 742 of 2017

IN THE COURT OF THE II ADDITIONAL JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE –CUM- XIII

ADDITIONAL JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS, RR DIST., AT

RAJENDRANAGAR

PRESENT: SRI. ANKIT SARWA,

II Addl. Junior Civil Judge –cum- XIII Addl. Judicial Magistrate of First Class, RR Dist., at Rajendranagar.

Friday, the 11th Day of April, 2025

CALENDAR CASE No. 742 of 2017

IN

Crime No. 661 of 2017

Between: The State through the Sub-Inspector of Police, P.S. Narsingi

...Complainant

A N D

Munawar Khan, S/o. Mohammed Khan, Age: 40 Yrs., Occ: Business, R/o. H.No. 9-11-176/A, Jinsi Bazar, Golconda Fort, Hyderabad.

...Accused

This case is coming up for final hearing before me in the presence of Sri. Praveen Naik, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor on behalf of prosecution and Sri. Md. Imran Khan, Sri. Azra Banu, Ms. Aparna, learned Counsel for accused and upon hearing both sides and having stood over for consideration till this day, this court delivered the following:

:: J U D G M E N T ::

I. Brief Averments of the Charge sheet :..........................................................................2

II. Pre-Trial Proceedings :..............................................................................................3

III. Trial Proceedings :...................................................................................................3

IV. Point for Determination:...........................................................................................4

V. Evidence on Record:..................................................................................................4

VI. The Relevant Provisions of Law:...............................................................................4

VII. Appreciation of Evidence & Conclusion :.................................................................5

The Sub-Inspector of Police, Narsingi filed a charge sheet in Crime No. 661 of 2017 of PS Narsingi against the accused for the offences punishable under Section 304(A) of the Indian Penal Code (hereinafter referred to as “IPC”) and 196 of Motor

Vehicle Act (herein referred to as “MV Act”).

2 CC. No. 742 of 2017

I. Brief Averments of the Charge sheet :

2.Succinctly stated, the prosecution's case is that on 20.09.2017 at around 10:00 hours, the complainant’s mother, Nanda Nayudamma, left her residence at

Friend’s Colony and proceeded on foot towards Alijapur to purchase a packet of milk.

While she was walking, and as she was passing through Friend’s Colony, the ac- cused—riding a Passion Pro bike bearing registration number AP13AB3731—ap- proached from the opposite direction and allegedly drove the vehicle in a rash and negligent manner, striking the complainant’s mother. As a result of the impact, she fell to the ground and sustained severe bleeding injuries to her head, rendering her unconscious. She was immediately shifted to Prime Hospital, Ameerpet; however, she has remained unconscious to date. The complainant, being preoccupied with her medical care at the hospital, was unable to lodge the complaint immediately. Ag- grieved by the incident, he filed an FIR at Narsingi Police Station on 22.09.2017 at 12:00 hours.

3.Based on the report, the Sub-Inspector of Police registered a case under Sec- tion 337 IPC and initiated the investigation. He conducted a scene of offence pan- chanama and prepared a rough sketch in the presence of LW8 and LW9. He then ex- amined eyewitnesses LW2 and LW3. Subsequently, LW14 visited Prime Hospital,

Ameerpet, to record the victim’s statement, but was unable to do so as she remained unconscious. While the investigation was ongoing, on 23.09.2017, LW14 received in- formation from Prime Hospital that the injured had succumbed to her injuries at 06:55 hours while undergoing treatment. Upon receiving this update, LW14 altered the section of law from Section 337 IPC to Section 304(A) IPC. He then collected the death summary from Prime Hospital and arranged for the body to be shifted to Os- mania General Hospital, Hyderabad, for postmortem examination (PME). Following this, LW14 recorded the statements of LW3 and LW4, secured two mediators - LW10 3 CC. No. 742 of 2017 and LW11 and conducted an inquest over the deceased’s body. LW12 later conducted the PME and submitted a detailed report. The body was subsequently handed over to the deceased's family for last rites. LW13 inspected the vehicle involved in the inci- dent and submitted a detailed inspection report. Satisfied with the findings of the in- vestigation, the Investigating Officer filed a charge sheet against the accused for an offence punishable under Section 304(A) of the Indian Penal Code.

II. Pre-Trial Proceedings :

4.The Court took cognizance of the offence under Sections 304(A) of IPC and

Sec. 196 MV Act against accused, registered the case as CC No. 742 of 2017 and issued summons to accused. On the appearance of accused, he was furnished with copies of all necessary documents as required under Section 207 Code of Criminal

Procedure (hereinafter referred to as Cr.P.C.). The accused was examined under

Section 251 Cr.P.C. for the offence under Section 304(A) of IPC and Sec. 196 MV Act by explaining the substance of it in his vernacular language, to which the Accused pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.

III. Trial Proceedings :

5.During the course of the trial, on behalf of the prosecution, PW1 to PW3 was examined and Ex.P1 to Ex.P9 were marked. The learned Assistant Public Prosecutor gave up the evidence of LW12, LW13. The Evidence of LW1 to LW11 was closed on the report filed by the prosecution. On completion of the examination of witnesses on behalf of the prosecution, the accused was examined U/Sec.313 Cr.P.C. and he was explained all the incriminating evidence available against him, he denied the same and reported no defence evidence on his behalf. Heard the arguments of the learned

Assistant Public Prosecutor and learned counsel for the accused person.

4 CC. No. 742 of 2017

IV. Point for Determination:

(i). “Whether the prosecution has proved the guilt of the accused beyond all reasonable doubt for the offence punishable under Sections 304(A) of IPC and Sec. 196 MV Act”?

V. Evidence on Record:

6.The charges leveled against the Accused are for the offence under Section 304(A) IPC and Sec. 196 MV Act. To establish the prosecution case, PW1 to PW3 was examined, and Ex. P1 to P9.

7. In brief, during the course of the trial In brief, during the course of the trial

PW1, the complainant, deposed that he had no knowledge of the facts of the case and turned hostile. PW2, an eyewitness, testified that on 20.09.2017 at around 10:00

AM, an accident occurred in front of his house located in Friends Colony, Manikonda.

While he was coming out of his apartment, he saw an elderly woman walking along the road. At that moment, a motorcycle—bearing registration number AP13AB3171 came from behind and struck the elderly woman. He stated that he had seen the rider of the bike at the time of the incident. The woman sustained bleeding injuries to her face and was immediately shifted to a private hospital in Manikonda. PW3 is the investigating officer. The evidence of the prosecution witnesses is discussed in de- tail at the time of appreciation of evidence to avoid repetition and for brevity.

VI. The Relevant Provisions of Law:

8.At this juncture this Court would like to discuss the relevant provision of law for which the accused stood charged. Section 304(A) of the Indian Penal Code deals with Theft in dwelling house, etc:

Section 304(A): Causing death by Negligence: Whoever causes the death of any person by doing any rash or negligent act not amounting to culpable homicide shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to two years, or with fine, or with both.

5 CC. No. 742 of 2017

9.To prove the offence under Section 304(A) of IPC, the prosecution is required to establish the following essential ingredients:--

(a) Death of the person in question in the accident;

(b) That the accused caused such accident due to which the deceased died, and

10.Section 196 of Motor Vehicle Act deals with Driving uninsured vehicle:

Section 196 MV Act: Whoever drives a motor vehicle or causes or allows a motor vehicle to be driven in contravention of the provisions of section 146 shall be punishable [for the first offence] with imprisonment which may extend to three months, or with fine [of two thousand rupees,], or with both [and for a subsequent offence shall be punishable with imprisonment for a term which may extend to three months, or with fine of four thousand rupees, or with both.

VII. Appreciation of Evidence & Conclusion :

10.Upon perusal of the record it is seen that to connect the accused with the offence, the prosecution examined PW1 to PW3 and got exhibited Ex. P1 to P9. PW1 is the Complainant, PW2 is Eye witness, PW3 is the I.O. and Filed Charge Sheet.

Ex.P1 is the Signature of PW1 on Complaint, Ex. P2 is the Sec. 161 Cr.P.C statement of PW1, Ex. P3 is Complaint, Ex. P4 is FIR, Ex. P5 is Scene of offence

Panchanama, Ex. P6 is Rough Sketch, Ex. P7 is Inquest Panchanama, Ex. P8 is

PME Report, Ex. P9 is MVI Report.

11. Firstly, the burden on the Prosecution is to prove that the death of Smt.

Nanda Nayudamma was caused in the incident. To prove the same, the prosecution 6 CC. No. 742 of 2017 has examined PW1 to PW3. PW1 who is complainant, turned hositle by deposing that he do not know anything about the facts of the case. PW2 who is eye witness deposed that an old lady met with an accident and she sustained bleeding injury on her face. PW3 deposed that he conducted the inquest proceedings over the body of the deceased and collected PME reports. Ex. P7 is the inquest panchanama and Ex.

P8 is the PME report. A perusal of the same shows that the deceased sustained injury on the scalp, brain, and a fracture injury on the spine. It states that the death was due to head injury and cervical spinal injury. A post-mortem examination report serves as a critical piece of evidence in establishing the cause of death and confirming that death has indeed occurred. The findings are based on thorough examination and scientific analysis, making the report a reliable document in legal proceedings. In this present case, though PW1 turned hostile, the evidence of PW3 and the postmortem examination report is sufficient to show that the deceased,

Nanda Nayudamma died in the accident. Thus, the prosecution is able to prove the first limb of the offence.

12. Now the question that needs to be determined is whether the accused caused the accident which resulted in the death of the deceased. PW1 is the complainant and he turned hostile by deposing that he does not know anything about the case.

PW2 deposed that an accident took place in front of his house and he saw the accused hit the deceased with a bike. He identified the accused in open Court. It is important to note that there is no TIP conducted in this case. The first time identification of the accused in open court is a weak evidence and cannot be given much weight age without there being any corroboration. In the present case, there is no other witness who has identified the accused. Thus, the identification of the accused by PW2 cannot be given much weightage. During the cross-examination,

PW1 admitted that he does not know the accused nor has any prior acquaintance 7 CC. No. 742 of 2017 with him. This has further weakened the identification of the Accused in open court by PW2. Apart from PW2, there is only PW3, the investigating officer who supported the case of the prosecution. It is a settled position of law that the investigating officer speaks through his or her witnesses. In the present case, the prime witnesses have turned hostile and as such there is no sufficient and cogent incriminating material available on record to show that the accused caused the accident. In such circumstances, the prosecution has failed to prove second and third limb of the offence under Section 304(A) IPC. Further, the accused is also charged with Section 196 MV Act. There is no documentary evidence filed before the Court to show that the vehicle was uninsured. There only statement is that of the investigating officer and the same is not sufficient to hold the accused guilty for the said offence. Thus, the prosecution has failed to prove the ingredients of Section 196 MV Act.

13.In view of the above, I hold that the prosecution failed to prove the guilt of the accused beyond all reasonable doubt. The cardinal principle of criminal

Jurisprudence is that, if the prosecution failed to prove its case beyond all reasonable doubt, the accused is entitled to be acquitted. Therefore, I find the accused not guilty of the offence with which he stood charged.

14.In the result, the Accused is found not guilty of offence punishable under Sec- tion 304(A) Indian Penal Code Sec. 196 MV Act and he is acquitted under Section 255(1) Cr.P.C. for the said offence. The bail bonds of the Accused shall stand can- celed, after the expiry of the appeal time.

(Typed to my dictation by Typist, corrected and pronounced by me in the open Court on this the 11 th Day of April, 2025)

II Additional Junior Civil Judge –cum-

XIII Addl. Judicial Magistrate of First Class,

RR Dist., at Rajendra Nagar.

8 CC. No. 742 of 2017

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

Witnesses Examined

For Prosecution:

PW1/Chaitanya NaiduComplainant PW2/Peer MastanEye Witness PW3/D. VenkateshI.O. and Filed Charge sheet

For Defence:

- None-

EXHIBITS MARKED

For Prosecution:

Ex.P1 is the Signature of PW1 on Complaint, Ex. P2 is the Sec. 161 Cr.P.C statement of PW1, Ex. P3 is Complaint, Ex. P4 is FIR, Ex. P5 is Scene of offence Panchanama, Ex. P6 is Rough Sketch, Ex. P7 is Inquest Panchanama, Ex. P8 is PME Report, Ex. P9 is MVI Report.

For Defence: MATERIAL OBJECTS MARKED - Nil –- Nil –

II Additional Junior Civil Judge –cum-

XIII Addl. Judicial Magistrate of First Class,

RR Dist., at Rajendra Nagar.

9 CC. No. 742 of 2017

C A L E N D A R

IN THE COURT OF THE II ADDITIONAL JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE

CUM- XIII JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS,

RANGA REDDY DISTRICT AT RAJENDRANAGAR

CALENDAR CASE. No. 742 of 2017

(Cr.No. 661 of 2017

Name of the Complainant :P.S Narsingi

Name of the Accused:

Munawar Khan, S/o. Mohammed Khan, Age: 40 Yrs., Occ: Business, R/o. H.No. 9-11-176/A, Jinsi Bazar, Golconda Fort, Hyderabad.

...Accused

Date of:

a) Offence under section:U/Sec. 304(A) of IPC and Sec. 196 MV Act

b) Offence:20.09.2017

c) Complaint:22.09.2017

d) Apprehension/Appearance: 22.11.2018

e) Commencement of trial: 31.01.2023

f) Close of trial: 17.03.2025

g) Judgment: 11.04.2025

h) Finding of Court: Found not guilty

RESULT:

In the result, the Accused is found not guilty of offence punishable under Section 304(A) Indian Penal Code Sec. 196 MV Act and he is acquitted under Section 255(1)

Cr.P.C. for the said offence. The bail bonds of the Accused shall stand canceled, after

the expiry of the appeal time.

Explanation for delay: NIL

II Additional Junior Civil Judge –cum-

XIII Addl. Judicial Magistrate of First Class,

RR Dist., at Rajendra Nagar.

Copy submitted to:

The Hon’ble I Addl. District and Sessions Judge, R.R.District at L.B.Nagar.

OS/588/2024

Noor Unnisa Begum vs The Mandal Revenue officer

11 Apr 2025

1OS NO.588 of 2024

IN THE COURT OF II ADDITIONAL JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE CUM-

XIII ADDITIONAL JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS

RR DIST: AT RAJENDRANAGAR

Present: SRI. ANKIT SARWA II Addl. Junior Civil Judge–cum- XIII Addl. Judicial Magistrate of First Class, RR Dist., at Rajendranagar.

Friday, the 11th day of April, 2025

O.S. No. 588 of 2024

Between:

1.Noor Unnisa Begum, W/o. Late Syed Maseehuddin, Age: 81 Yrs., Occ: House wife, R/o. H.No. 16-9-714/A/2, Old Malakpet, Hyderabad.

2.Syeda Ashraf Sameen, D/o. Late Syed Maseehuddin, W/o. MA Najeeb Khan, Age: 58 Yrs., Occ: Housewife, R/o. H.No. 16-9-690/11/2/A, Old Malakpet, Hyderabad.

3.Syeda Kausar, D/o. Late Syed Maseehuddin, W/o. Abu Taher Mohammed Abdul Shukoor, Age: 57 Yrs., Occ: House wife, R/o. H.No. 16-9-683/6/6/1, Old Malakpet, Hyderabad.

4.Syed Ziauddin Ahmed, S/o. Late Syed Maseehuddin, Age: 53 Yrs., Occ: Pvt. Employee, R/o. H.No. 16-9-714/A/2, Old Malakpet, Hyderabad.

5.Syed Valiuddin Ahmed, S/o. Late Syed Maseehuddin, Age: 50 Yrs., Occ: Pvt. Employee, R/o. H.No. 16-9-422/4/402, Old Malakpet, Hyderabad.

A N D

1.The Mandal Revenue Officer (Tahsildar), Shamshabad Mandal, Ranga Reddy District, At Shamshabad.

2.All concerned

.......Defendants

This suit is coming before me for final hearing in presence of Sri. M/s. Md. Muntajeeb Uddin Siddiqui, Advocate for plaintiffs and Defendant No.1 and Defendant No. 2 are set exparte; upon perusing the material papers on record, upon hearing and having stood over for consideration till this day, this court delivered the following:

2OS NO.588 of 2024

:: J U D G M E N T ::

I. Brief Averments of Plaint:....................................................................................2 II. Pre-Trial Proceedings:.........................................................................................3 III. Trial Proceedings:..............................................................................................4 IV. Point for Consideration:.....................................................................................4 V. Appreciation of Evidence & Findings:.................................................................4

This is a suit filed by the plaintiff No.1 to 5 to declare the plaintiff No.1 to 5 as the legal heirs and successors of Late Syed Maseehuddin.

I. Brief Averments of Plaint:

2. According to the plaint, it is submitted that Plaintiff No. 1 is the mother of

Plaintiffs No. 2, 3, 4, and 5. The husband of Plaintiff No. 1 and the father of

Plaintiffs No. 2, 3, 4, and 5, namely Syed Maseehuddin, passed away on 20.02.2009, leaving behind the plaintiffs herein as his legal heirs and successors.

3.It is further submitted that during his lifetime, Syed Maseehuddin purchased an open plot bearing No. 20, Sector–II, admeasuring 240 square yards (or 200.7 square meters), situated in Grand Ville, Sy.No. 71, Kishanguda Village,

Shamshabad Mandal, Ranga Reddy District, falling under the jurisdiction of the

Gram Panchayat at Ootpally Village. The said property was purchased through a registered Sale Deed bearing Document No. 8474/2007, dated 05.12.2007, from

Mrs. Razia Begum, W/o. Mohd. Ibrahim Khan, represented by her GPA holder, Sri

B. Siva Kumar. Since the date of purchase, the husband of Plaintiff No. 1 had been in physical possession of the said plot.

4.It is also submitted that the plaintiffs approached Defendant No. 1 on 24.08.2024 for the issuance of a legal heir certificate. However, Defendant No. 1 refused to issue the certificate and advised the plaintiffs to obtain such a certificate from a competent court of law. Under these circumstances, the plaintiffs have 3OS NO.588 of 2024 instituted the present suit before this Court, seeking a declaration that they are the legal heirs and successors of the late Syed Maseehuddin.

II. Pre-Trial Proceedings:

5. The summons was served to Defendant No. 1 through the Inward Section.

No one appeared before the Court on behalf of Defendant No. 1 to object to the plaintiff’s claim. Therefore, Defendant No. 1 was set exparte on 30.01.2025.

Defendant No. 2 was duly notified, and a newspaper publication was issued. No one appeared before the Court on behalf of Defendant No. 2 to object to the plaintiffs' claim. Consequently, Defendant No. 2 was set exparte on 23.12.2024.

III. Trial Proceedings:

6. To prove the suit claim, the plaintiffs filed their chief examination affidavit and examined Plaintiff No.1 as PW1. Ex. A1 to Ex. A11 are marked on behalf of the plaintiffs. Heard the learned Counsel for the plaintiffs and perused the record.

IV. Point for Consideration:

7. Now the point for consideration is - “Whether the plaintiffs are entitled to declare the plaintiff as the legal heir and successors of Late Syed Maseehuddin ?”

V. Appreciation of Evidence & Findings:

8. PW1 filed her chief examination affidavit, reiterating the contents mentioned in the plaint. To support the same, PW1 relied upon Ex. A1 is CC of Registered Sale

Deed Br.Doc.No. 8474/2007 Dt. 05.12.2007, Ex. A2 is the Original Death

Certificate of Late Syed Maseehuddin Dt. 20.02.2009, Ex. A3 is Original Aadhar card of Plaintiff No.1, Ex. A4 is Original Aadhar card of Plaintiff No.2, Ex. A5 is

Original Aadhar card of Plaintiff No.3, Ex. A6 is Original Aadhar card of Plaintiff 4OS NO.588 of 2024

No.4, Ex. A7 is Original Aadhar card of Plaintiff No.5, Ex. A8 is Encumbrance

Certificate for the period from 01.05.1995 to 22.09.2024, Ex. A9 is Market Value

Certificate of Suit Schedule property Dt. 23.09.2024, Ex. A10 is Original Pan card of Plaintiff No.2, Ex. A11 is the Original Pan Card of Plaintiff No.3.

9.A perusal of Exhibit A2 shows that Syed Maseehuddin died on 20.02.2009. It is the Death Certificate issued by Registrar Birth and Death, GHMC. Plaintiff No.1 is the wife of the deceased and Plaintiff No.2 to 5 are children of the deceased. To prove the same, the plaintiffs have filed the Aadhar cards and PAN Cards. Ex-A3 is the Aadhar card of Plaintiff No.1 and it shows that she is the wife of Late Syed

Maseehuddin. Ex-A4 is the Aadhar card of Plaintiff No.2. It does not reflect the name of the deceased. However, Ex-A10 is the PAN Card of Plaintiff No.2 and it shows the deceased as her father. Ex-A5 is the Aadhar card of Plaintiff No.3. It does not reflect the name of the deceased. However, Ex-A11 is the PAN Card of Plaintiff

No.3 and it shows the deceased as her father. Ex-A6 is the Aadhar card of Plaintiff

No.4 and it shows that he was the son of the deceased. Ex-A7 is the Aadhar card of

Plaintiff No. 5 and it reflects the name of the deceased. The above documents establish the relationship of the Plaintiffs with deceased Syed Maseehuddin. By way of the above exhibits the plaintiffs have sufficiently proved that they are the legal heirs of deceased Syed Maseehuddin.

10.The plaintiffs also contends that during the lifetime of the deceased Syed

Maseehuddin, he had purchased an open plot Br.No. 20, Sector-II, admeasuring 240 Sq.Yds., or 200.7 Sq.Mts., Grand Villa in Sy.No. 71 situated at Kishanguda

Village, Shamshabad Mandal vide sale deed Br.No. 8474/2007 Dt. 05.12.2007. The said document is marked as Ex-A1. Upon perusal of the same, it is seen that one

Mrs. Razia Begum through her agreement of sale cum GPA holder B. Siva Kumar, 5OS NO.588 of 2024 had sold the property to Late Syed Maseehuddin. The schedule of the property is tallied and is found to be the same as pleaded. The plaintiffs has also filed the

Encumbrance Certificate for the period 01.05.1995 to 22.09.2024 showing the transaction of last Twenty Nine (29) years. Perusal of the said Exhibit shows the transaction as stated in Ex-A1. There is no further transaction reflecting in the said document over the suit schedule property. The plaintiffs have established that late

Syed Maseehuddin acquired the suit schedule property through Ex. A1 and established that the property still remained in the name of late Syed Maseehuddin though Ex. A8. Therefore, the plaintiffs are entitled for declaration as successors to the suit schedule property. Defendant No. 1 did not object to the plaintiffs' relationship with the late Syed Maseehuddin. Additionally, Defendant No. 2 failed to appear before the court to dispute the plaintiffs' claims. As a result, the evidence of PW1 remains unchallenged and unrebutted. Therefore, the point is answered in favor of the plaintiffs.

11. In these circumstances, this court finds that the plaintiffs have amply proved their case by examining PW1 and by producing documentary evidence i.e., Ex.A1 to

Ex.A11.

12. In the result, the suit is decreed declaring the plaintiffs as the legal heir and successors of Late Syed Maseehuddin. In the circumstances of the case, no order as to cost.

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

II ADDI. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE –CUM-

XIII ADDL. JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS,

RR DIST., AT RAJENDRANAGAR.

6OS NO.588 of 2024

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

WITNESSES EXAMINED FOR

PLAINTIFFSDEFENDANTS

PW-1 – Noor Unnisa Begum - None -

EXHIBITS MARKED FOR

PLAINTIFFS:- Ex. A1 is CC of Registered Sale Deed Br.Doc.No. 8474/2007 Dt. 05.12.2007, Ex. A2 is the Original Death Certificate of Late Syed Maseehuddin Dt. 20.02.2009, Ex. A3 is Original Aadhar card of Plaintiff No.1, Ex. A4 is Original Aadhar card of Plaintiff No.2, Ex. A5 is Original Aadhar card of Plaintiff No.3, Ex. A6 is Original Aadhar card of Plaintiff No.4, Ex. A7 is Original Aadhar card of Plaintiff No.5, Ex. A8 is Encumbrance Certificate for the period from 01.05.1995 to 22.09.2024, Ex. A9 is Market Value Certificate of Suit Schedule property Dt. 23.09.2024, Ex. A10 is Original Pan card of Plaintiff No.2, Ex. A11 is the Original Pan Card of Plaintiff No.3.

DEFENDANTS:- - NIL -

II ADDI. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE –CUM-

XIII ADDL. JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS,

RR DIST., AT RAJENDRANAGAR.

OS/89/2025

Rekula Ravinder Reddy vs The Tahsildar

25 Apr 2025

1OS NO. 89 of 2025

IN THE COURT OF II ADDITIONAL JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE CUM-

XIII ADDITIONAL JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS

RR DIST: AT RAJENDRANAGAR

Present: Smt. Muddasani Neelima, Prl. Junior Civil Judge cum XI Addl. Judicial Magistrate of First Class, FAC II Addl. Junior Civil Judge–cum- XIII Addl. Judicial Magistrate of First Class, RR Dist., at Rajendranagar.

Friday, the 25th day of April , 2025

O.S. No. 89 of 2025

Between:

1.Rekula Ravinder Reddy S/o. Late R. Krishna Reddy, Age: 62 Yrs., Occ: Retired Employee, R/o. Villa No. 75, Legend Chimes, Kokapet Village, Gandipet Mandal, RR Dist.

2.Siri Rekula D/o. Rekula Ravinder Reddy, Age: 37 Yrs., Occ: Pvt Service, Permanent Resident of Premises No. 8-3-1006/A, Flat No.1-S, Plot No. 94/A, Royal Heritage Apartments, Srinagar Colony, Hyderabad and Presently residing at 9, Gazania Drive, Old Bridge, New Jersey- 08857.

3.Rekula Dheeraj S/o. Rekula Ravinder Reddy, Age: 36 Yrs., Occ: Pvt Service, R/o. Villa No. 75, Legend Chimes, Kokapet Village, Gandipet Mandal, RR Dist. Presently residing at 3916, Liverpool Dr. Jefferson City, No. 65109.

Plaintiff No.2 and 3 are represented by their GPA Holder & Father Rekula Ravinder Reddy S/o. Late R. Krishna Reddy i.e., Plaintiff No.1 herein vide GPA Dt. 22.01.2025.

......Plaintiffs

A N D

1.The Tasildhar, Gandipet Mandal, Ranga Reddy District.

2.All concerned. .......Defendants

This suit is coming before me for final hearing in presence of Sri. Malgari Penta Reddy, Advocate for plaintiffs and Defendant No.1 and Defendant No. 2 are set exparte; upon perusing the material papers on record, upon hearing and having stood over for consideration till this day, this court delivered the following:

2OS NO. 89 of 2025

:: J U D G M E N T ::

This is a suit filed by the plaintiffs against the defendants to declare the plaintiffs as the legal heirs of Late Rekula Manjula @ R. Manjula.

2. The brief facts of the plaint are that, Plaintiff No. 1 is the husband, and

Plaintiff No. 2 is the daughter and Plaintiff No.3 is Son of the deceased, Late Rekula

Manjula, who passed away on January 22nd, 2024. The plaintiffs are the only surviving legal heirs of Late Rekula Manjula, and there are no other legal representatives or successors. The plaintiffs further state that, to avoid future complications, they approached Defendant No. 1 on 22.06.2024 to obtain a legal heir certificate. However, Defendant No. 1 refused to issue the certificate and informed the plaintiffs that they should obtain it from the competent court of law.

Under these circumstances, the plaintiffs have filed this suit before the court to declare themselves as the legal heirs of Late Rekula Manjula. Hence, the suit.

3. The summons was served to Defendant No. 1 through the Inward Section.

No one appeared on behalf of Defendant No. 1 to contest the Plaintiff’s claim. As a result, Defendant No. 1 was set ex parte on 17.04.2025. Defendant No. 2 was duly notified, and a newspaper publication was issued. Similarly, no one appeared on behalf of Defendant No. 2 to contest the Plaintiff's claim. Consequently, Defendant

No. 2 was also set ex parte on 17.04.2025.

4. To prove the suit claim, the plaintiff No. 1 filed his chief examination affidavit and examined himself as PW1. Ex. A1 to Ex. A5 are marked on behalf of the plaintiffs. Heard the learned Counsel for the plaintiff and perused the record.

5. Now the point for consideration is - “Whether the plaintiffs are entitled to be declared as the legal heir of Late Rekula Manjula ?” 3OS NO. 89 of 2025

Point:

6. PW1 filed his chief examination affidavit, reiterating the contents of the plaint. To support his claims, PW1 relied on the following exhibits: Exhibit A1, the original death certificate of Late Rekula Manjula, dated 22.01.2024, issued on 05.02.2024; Exhibit A2, the original Aadhar card of Plaintiff No. 1; Exhibit A3, the original Aadhar card of Plaintiff No. 2; and Exhibit A4, the original Aadhar card of

Plaintiff No. 3, Exhibit A5, the original Aadhar card of Late Rekula Manjula.

7.A perusal of Exhibit A1 shows that Late Rekula Manjula passed away on 22.01.2024, and her death is confirmed by this document. It further states that she is wife of Plaintiff No.1. Exhibit A2 is the Aadhar Card of Plaintiff No. 1. Exhibit A3 is Aadhar card of Plaintiff No.2 which shows that she is daughter of Plaintiff No.1.

Exhibit A4 is Aadhar card of Plaintiff No.3 which shows that he is Son of Plaintiff

No.1. Exhibit A5 is the original Aadhar card of the deceased, showing the same details. This document establishes the relationship of Plaintiff No. 1 to Plaintiff No.

3 as the Husband and children of the deceased. Therefore, there is consistency between the plaintiffs' testimony and the documentary evidence, confirming their relationship with the deceased. Defendant No. 1 did not object to the plaintiffs' relationship with Late Rekula Manjula. Additionally, Defendant No. 2 failed to appear in court to dispute the plaintiffs' claims. As a result, the testimony of PW1 remains unchallenged and unrebutted. Therefore, this point is answered in favor of the plaintiffs.

8. In these circumstances, this court finds that the plaintiffs have amply proved their case by examining PW1 and by producing documentary evidence i.e.,

Ex.A1 to Ex.A5.

4OS NO. 89 of 2025

9. In the result, the suit is decreed declaring the Plaintiff Nos.1 to 3 as the legal heirs of Late Rekula Manjula. In the circumstances of the case, no order as to cost.

(Typed to my dictation by the Typist, corrected and pronounced by me in the open Court on this the 25 th day of April, 2025).

FAC II ADDI. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE –CUM-

XIII ADDL. JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS,

RR DIST., AT RAJENDRANAGAR.

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

WITNESSES EXAMINED FOR

PLAINTIFFSDEFENDANTS

PW-1 – Rekula Ravinder Reddy - None -

EXHIBITS MARKED FOR

PLAINTIFFS:- Ex.A1 is the Original death certificate of Late Rekula Manjula Ex.A2 is the Original Aadhar card of Plaintiff No.1 Ex.A3 is the Original Aadhar card of Plaintiff No.2 Ex.A4 is the Original Aadhar card of Plaintiff No.3 Ex.A5 is the Original Aadhar Card of Deceased/R. Manjula

DEFENDANTS

- NIL -

FAC II ADDI. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE –CUM-

XIII ADDL. JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS,

RR DIST., AT RAJENDRANAGAR.

OS/89/2025

Rekula Ravinder Reddy vs The Tahsildar

25 Apr 2025

1OS NO. 89 of 2025

IN THE COURT OF II ADDITIONAL JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE CUM-

XIII ADDITIONAL JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS

RR DIST: AT RAJENDRANAGAR

Friday, the 25th day of April , 2025

O.S. No. 89 of 2025

Between:

1.Rekula Ravinder Reddy S/o. Late R. Krishna Reddy, Age: 62 Yrs., Occ: Retired Employee, R/o. Villa No. 75, Legend Chimes, Kokapet Village, Gandipet Mandal, RR Dist.

Plaintiff No.2 and 3 are represented by their GPA Holder & Father Rekula Ravinder Reddy S/o. Late R. Krishna Reddy i.e., Plaintiff No.1 herein vide GPA Dt. 22.01.2025.

......Plaintiffs

A N D

1.The Tasildhar, Gandipet Mandal, Ranga Reddy District.

2.All concerned. .......Defendants

2OS NO. 89 of 2025

:: J U D G M E N T ::

This is a suit filed by the plaintiffs against the defendants to declare the plaintiffs as the legal heirs of Late Rekula Manjula @ R. Manjula.

2. The brief facts of the plaint are that, Plaintiff No. 1 is the husband, and

Plaintiff No. 2 is the daughter and Plaintiff No.3 is Son of the deceased, Late Rekula

Under these circumstances, the plaintiffs have filed this suit before the court to declare themselves as the legal heirs of Late Rekula Manjula. Hence, the suit.

3. The summons was served to Defendant No. 1 through the Inward Section.

No. 2 was also set ex parte on 17.04.2025.

5. Now the point for consideration is - “Whether the plaintiffs are entitled to be declared as the legal heir of Late Rekula Manjula ?” 3OS NO. 89 of 2025

Point:

Plaintiff No. 3, Exhibit A5, the original Aadhar card of Late Rekula Manjula.

Exhibit A4 is Aadhar card of Plaintiff No.3 which shows that he is Son of Plaintiff

No.1. Exhibit A5 is the original Aadhar card of the deceased, showing the same details. This document establishes the relationship of Plaintiff No. 1 to Plaintiff No.

8. In these circumstances, this court finds that the plaintiffs have amply proved their case by examining PW1 and by producing documentary evidence i.e.,

Ex.A1 to Ex.A5.

4OS NO. 89 of 2025

9. In the result, the suit is decreed declaring the Plaintiff Nos.1 to 3 as the legal heirs of Late Rekula Manjula. In the circumstances of the case, no order as to cost.

(Typed to my dictation by the Typist, corrected and pronounced by me in the open Court on this the 25 th day of April, 2025).

FAC II ADDI. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE –CUM-

XIII ADDL. JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS,

RR DIST., AT RAJENDRANAGAR.

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

WITNESSES EXAMINED FOR

PLAINTIFFSDEFENDANTS

PW-1 – Rekula Ravinder Reddy - None -

EXHIBITS MARKED FOR

DEFENDANTS

- NIL -

FAC II ADDI. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE –CUM-

XIII ADDL. JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS,

RR DIST., AT RAJENDRANAGAR.

OS/59/2025

Aparna Samala vs The Tahsildar

16 Apr 2025

1OS NO.59 of 2025

IN THE COURT OF II ADDITIONAL JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE CUM-

XIII ADDITIONAL JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS

RR DIST: AT RAJENDRANAGAR

Present: SRI. ANKIT SARWA II Addl. Junior Civil Judge–cum- XIII Addl. Judicial Magistrate of First Class, RR Dist., at Rajendranagar.

Tuesday, the 16th day of April , 2025

O.S. No. 59 of 2025

Between:

1.Aparna Samala, W/o. Late Kothapalli Phani Krishna, Age: 40 Yrs., Occ: Pvt Employee, R/o. My Home Avatar, Block 6, Flat No. 1606, Narsingi, VTC Narsingi, KV Ranga Reddy.

2.Kothapalli Pranay S/o. Late Kothapalli Phani Krishna, Age: 11 Yrs., Occ: Student, R/o. My Home Avatar, Block 6, Flat No. 1606, Narsingi, VTC Narsingi, KV Ranga Reddy. (Plaintiff No.2 is minor and represented by his natural mother i.e., Plaintiff No.2).

…..Plaintiff No.1 and 2

A N D

1.The Thasildhar, Gandipet Mandal, Aziz Nagar, Ranga Reddy District, State of Telangana.

2.All concerned

…..Defendants

This suit is coming before me for final hearing in presence of Ms. V. Sravana Laxmi, Ms. Vishnu Chandana, Advocate for plaintiffs and Defendant No.1 and Defendant No. 2 are set exparte; upon perusing the material papers on record, upon hearing and having stood over for consideration till this day, this court delivered the following:

:: J U D G M E N T ::

I. Brief Averments of Plaint:....................................................................................2 II. Pre-Trial Proceedings:.........................................................................................3 III. Trial Proceedings:..............................................................................................3 IV. Point for Consideration:.....................................................................................3 V. Appreciation of Evidence & Findings:.................................................................3 2OS NO.59 of 2025

This is a suit filed by the plaintiffs to declare the plaintiffs as the legal heir of

Late Kothapalli Phani Krishna.

I. Brief Averments of Plaint:

2. According to the plaint, Plaintiff No. 1 is the wife, and Plaintiff No. 2 is the natural son of the late Kothapalli Phani Krishna, who passed away on 26.06.2019, leaving the plaintiffs as his legal heirs and successors. It is further submitted that the plaintiffs approached Defendant No. 1 on 27.01.2025 to obtain a legal heir certificate. However, Defendant No. 1 refused to issue the certificate, stating that, as per a Government Order (G.O.) issued by the State Government, only a competent civil court is authorized to issue such a certificate. In light of these circumstances, the plaintiffs have filed the present suit before this Hon’ble Court, seeking a declaration that they are the legal heirs of the late Kothapalli Phani

Krishna. Hence, the Suit.

II. Pre-Trial Proceedings:

3. The summons was served to Defendant No. 1 through the Inward Section.

No one appeared before the Court on behalf of Defendant No. 1 to object to the plaintiff’s claim. Therefore, Defendant No. 1 was set exparte on 28.03.2025.

III. Trial Proceedings:

4. To prove the suit claim, the plaintiffs filed their chief examination affidavit and examined Plaintiff No.1 as PW1. Ex. A1 to Ex. A4 are marked on behalf of the plaintiff. Heard the learned Counsel for the plaintiffs and perused the record.

3OS NO.59 of 2025

IV. Point for Consideration:

5. Now the point for consideration is - “Whether the plaintiffs are entitled to be declared as the legal heir of Late Kothapalli Phani Krishna ?”

V. Appreciation of Evidence & Findings:

6. PW1 filed her chief examination affidavit, reiterating the contents mentioned in the plaint. To support the same, PW1 relied upon Ex. A1 is the Original Death

Certificate of Late Kothpalli Phani Krishna Dt. 26.06.2019, Ex. A2 is the Aadhar card of Plaintiff No.1, Ex. A3 is the Aadhar card of Plaintiff No.2, Ex. A4 is the Birth

Certificate of Plaintiff No. 2.

7.A perusal of Exhibit A1 shows that Late Kothpalli Phani Krishna died on 26.06.2019. Exhibit A2 is the Aadhar card of plaintiff No.1, and Exhibit A3 is the

Aadhar card of Plaintiff No.2 and Exhibit A4 is the Birth Certificate of Plaintiff No.2.

A perusal of the same shows that Plaintiff No.1 was the wife of Late Kothpalli Phani

Krishna and Plaintiff No.2 is the son of Late Kothpalli Phani Krishna. These documents confirm that the plaintiffs are the wife and son of Late Kothpalli Phani

Krishna, establishing their relationship. The Aadhar card of Plaintiff No.2 shows the name of Plaintiff No.1. However, Ex. A4 is the birth certificate of Plaintiff No.2 and it reflects the name of the deceased as the father of Plaintiff No.2. Defendant

No. 1 did not object to the plaintiff’s relationship with the late Kothpalli Phani

Krishna. Additionally, Defendant No. 2 failed to appear before the court to dispute the plaintiff’s claims. As a result, the evidence of PW1 remains unchallenged and unrebutted. Therefore, this point is answered in favor of the plaintiffs.

4OS NO.59 of 2025

8. In these circumstances, this court finds that the plaintiffs have amply proved their case by examining PW1 and by producing documentary evidence i.e.,

Ex.A1 to Ex.A4.

9. In the result, the suit is decreed declaring the plaintiffs as the legal heir of

Late Kothpalli Phani Krishna. In the circumstances of the case, no order as to cost.

(Typed to my dictation by Typist, corrected and pronounced by me in the open Court on this the 16 th day of April, 2025).

II ADDI. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE –CUM-

XIII ADDL. JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS,

RR DIST., AT RAJENDRANAGAR.

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

WITNESSES EXAMINED FOR

PLAINTIFFSDEFENDANTS

PW-1 – Aparna Samala - None -

EXHIBITS MARKED FOR

PLAINTIFFS:-

Ex. A1 is the Original Death Certificate of Late Kothpalli Phani Krishna Dt. 26.06.2019, Ex. A2 is the Aadhar card of Plaintiff No.1, Ex. A3 is the Aadhar card of Plaintiff No.2, Ex. A4 is the Birth Certificate of Plaintiff No. 2.

DEFENDANTS

- NIL -

II ADDI. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE –CUM-

XIII ADDL. JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS,

RR DIST., AT RAJENDRANAGAR.

Order Record 318 total

Case No.	Parties	Date	Type	Outcome
OS/89/2025	Rekula Ravinder Reddy vs The Tahsildar	25 Apr 2025	Copy of Judgement	—
OS/59/2025	Aparna Samala vs The Tahsildar	16 Apr 2025	Copy of Judgement	—
OS/588/2024	Noor Unnisa Begum vs The Mandal Revenue officer	11 Apr 2025	Copy of Judgement	—
CC/300742/2017	PS NARSINGI vs MUNAWAR KHAN	11 Apr 2025	Copy of Judgement	Acquitted
CC/300597/2017	PS NARSINGI vs A.PRABHAKAR @ PAPAIAH	10 Apr 2025	Copy of Judgement	—
OS/465/2024	Alluri Prasanna Kumar vs Poonam Kumari keshri	04 Apr 2025	other	—
CC/300277/2017	P.S.RAIDURGAM vs BABA RAO WAKADE	03 Apr 2025	Copy of Judgement	—
CC/302231/2018	PS NARSINGI vs ADAPPA DEVID	03 Apr 2025	Copy of Judgement	—
OS/516/2024	Gundu Swarna Latha and 3 others vs The Tahsildar Shamshabad Mandal, RR District	02 Apr 2025	Copy of Judgement	—
OS/662/2024	Golla Shoba vs The Tahsildar	02 Apr 2025	Copy of Judgement	—
OS/836/2022	afzal unnisa vs Vsmohammed Abdul Moghani	02 Apr 2025	Copy of Judgement	—
CC/301563/2018	PS RAIDURGAM vs Y GOVIND	02 Apr 2025	Copy of Judgement	—
OS/397/2024	Soppari Laxmamma vs The Tahsildar	01 Apr 2025	Copy of Judgement	—
OS/425/2022	B.BHARATHAMMA AND OTHERS vs THE MRO GANDIPET AND ALL CONCERNED	01 Apr 2025	Copy of Judgement	—
CC/966/2019	PS Narsingi vs Vsg varadaraya charya	01 Apr 2025	Copy of Judgement	—
CC/2848/2022	PS RAIDURGAM vs Nooran nasar khan	01 Apr 2025	Copy of Judgement	—
CC/1262/2021	SMT.R.VANAJA W/O.R.NARSINGH RAO vs M/S.S H BULIDERS REP BY M.D K.SATYAM BABU AND 3 OTHERS	27 Mar 2025	Copy of Judgement	—
CC/300323/2017	PS NARSINGI vs KOLLURU ANAND	27 Mar 2025	Copy of Judgement	—
CC/301785/2018	PS RAIDURGAM vs SABAVATH RAJU	27 Mar 2025	Copy of Judgement	—
CC/300732/2017	K.Ramchandra Rao vs Th.Babu yadav	24 Mar 2025	Copy of Judgement	—
CC/300652/2017	P.S.MOINABAD vs J SUDHAKAR	20 Mar 2025	Copy of Judgement	—
CC/300761/2017	Amirshetti Yugander vs Ch.Maibaiah	20 Mar 2025	Copy of Judgement	—
CC/301359/2018	PS RAIDURGAM vs KARTHIK KISHORE BAJAJ	19 Mar 2025	Copy of Judgement	—
CC/302573/2018	PS RAIDRGUM vs SADULOUR JAYANTHI	19 Mar 2025	Copy of Judgement	—
CC/302695/2018	PS NARSINGI vs NUNE SHIVA SHANKAR	19 Mar 2025	Copy of Judgement	—
CC/1260/2021	R.NARSINGH RAO S/O.LATE YADAIAH vs M/S.S H BULIDERS REP BY M.D K.SATYAM BABU AND 3 OTHERS	18 Mar 2025	Copy of Judgement	—
CC/302180/2018	PS RAIDURGUM vs VERENKI PULLA RAO	18 Mar 2025	Copy of Judgement	—
CC/301206/2018	P.S.NARSINGI vs LINGAMAIAH	11 Mar 2025	Copy of Judgement	—
CC/301064/2018	P.S.NARSINGI vs MADHAVAN MURUGESAN	07 Mar 2025	Copy of Judgement	—
CC/200031/2014	Aziz Aliya vs Syed Abid Ali @ Abbas and another	05 Mar 2025	Copy of Judgement	—
OS/191/2024	Sadhala Surya Reddy vs The Tahasildar	03 Mar 2025	Copy of Judgement	—
OS/490/2024	Poola Venkatesham vs The Tahsildhar	03 Mar 2025	Copy of Judgement	—
OS/525/2024	Shaik Abdullah vs ALL concern, And, Thasildar, Rajendranagar Mandal, RR Dist	03 Mar 2025	Copy of Judgement	—
OS/547/2024	Thokati Vinod Kumar vs Tahsildar	03 Mar 2025	Copy of Judgement	—
OS/573/2024	M.G. Chandrakala vs V. Jagadeswar	03 Mar 2025	Copy of Judgement	—
CC/301174/2018	P.S.RAIDURGAM vs DANABOINA YADAIAH	03 Mar 2025	Copy of Judgement	—
OS/605/2024	Neratla Mahendar Goud vs Kyama Narsimha	28 Feb 2025	Copy of Order	—
OS/386/2023	Reshma Nayeem vs Mohammed Yousuf Uddin Mahmood	27 Feb 2025	Copy of Order	—
OS/239/2023	Ashok Kumar Singh vs Akhilesh Kumar Singh	20 Feb 2025	Copy of Order	—
OS/430/2020	M/s.Raghavendra Nagar Coop. Housing Society Ltd, Rep by Mr.Rajendra Prasad Nagla vs Bhagawan Das Sankla	20 Feb 2025	Copy of Order	—
CC/200320/2014	Narsingi vs Nithin Gupta	19 Feb 2025	Copy of Judgement	—
CC/300445/2017	Raidurgam vs Dr.Chagantipati Sudheer Babu	19 Feb 2025	Copy of Judgement	—
OS/215/2020	M/s.Raghavendra Nagar Coop Housing Society LTd REp by Mr.Rajendra PRasad vs Mrs.Geetha Agarwal	11 Feb 2025	Copy of Order	—
CC/300732/2018	PS MOINABAD vs MOKILA NARSIMHA	10 Feb 2025	Copy of Judgement	—
CC/301932/2018	PS NARSINGI vs KAVALI SRISAILAM	10 Feb 2025	Copy of Judgement	—
OS/448/2024	Purple En Vogue vs Prestige Estates Projects Limited	07 Feb 2025	Copy of Order	—
CC/300233/2017	PS NARSINGI vs GUNDU SANTHOSH KUMAR	07 Feb 2025	Copy of Judgement	—
CC/300719/2018	P.S.MOINABAD vs NAGULAPALLY RAMULU	07 Feb 2025	Copy of Judgement	—
CC/300781/2015	PS RAIDURGAM vs JOSHUA WILLIAMS BONDADA	07 Feb 2025	Copy of Judgement	—
CC/301219/2018	P.S.MOINABAD vs NAGULAPALLY RAMULU	07 Feb 2025	Copy of Judgement	—
CC/300315/2017	PS NARSINGI vs JAKKA RAMANJANEYULU	06 Feb 2025	Copy of Judgement	—
OS/130/2023	Y.Lakshmi vs Bhoopathi Vani	05 Feb 2025	Copy of Judgement	—
CC/300401/2016	P.S.NARSINGI vs GOVINDU MALLA REDDY	05 Feb 2025	Copy of Judgement	—
CC/300311/2016	PS NARSINGI vs CHANDANELLI VINOD @ MITTUBABU	04 Feb 2025	Copy of Judgement	—
CC/300518/2018	PS RAIDURGAM vs SAILESH KUMAR AGARWAL	04 Feb 2025	Copy of Order	—
CC/301065/2018	P.S.NARSINGI vs JINKA RAJU	04 Feb 2025	Copy of Judgement	—
OS/514/2024	Razia Sultana vs All Concerned	03 Feb 2025	Copy of Judgement	—
OS/595/2024	Vallep Raju vs The Tahsildar	03 Feb 2025	Copy of Judgement	—
OS/260/2023	E.Kishore kumar vs Om prakash Gantaji	28 Jan 2025	Copy of Order	—
OS/393/2024	Mohammed Abdul Mateen vs Jaweria Fatima	27 Jan 2025	Copy of Order	—
CC/200486/2014	Narsingi vs Ahmmed Abdulla Amoodi	27 Jan 2025	Copy of Judgement	—
OS/681/2023	Pallemoni Sharada Devi vs The Tahsildar	24 Jan 2025	Copy of Judgement	—
CC/2219/2021	D.Shekar vs D. Shiva rao	24 Jan 2025	Copy of Judgement	—
CC/300668/2017	P.S.RAIDURGAM vs MOHD MOZAM	24 Jan 2025	Copy of Judgement	—
OS/200132/2017	Girikala Narsimhhadas God vs Vemula Narsimma	22 Jan 2025	Copy of Judgement	—
OS/200165/2017	R.Raghakrishna Murthy vs K.Madhusudhan Reddy	22 Jan 2025	Copy of Judgement	—
CC/301045/2018	PS RAIDURGAM vs SADULA NARENDAR	22 Jan 2025	Copy of Judgement	—
CC/158/2019	PS RAIDURGAM vs JANMULA SHYAMBABU	17 Jan 2025	Copy of Judgement	—
CC/200458/2014	Narsingi vs T.Ashok Kumar	17 Jan 2025	Copy of Judgement	—
CC/300362/2017	PS RAIDRUGAM vs RAJ KAMAL	17 Jan 2025	Copy of Judgement	—
OS/17/2022	K.ASHOK KUMAR S/O.LATE K.PULLAIAH vs M/S.V.R.CONSTRUCTIONS REP BY GHANTA RAJASEKHAR RAO	10 Jan 2025	Copy of Order	—
CC/300451/2017	Moinabad vs S.Gnaneshwar	09 Jan 2025	Copy of Judgement	—
OS/365/2023	Elaprolu Anuradha vs Madhar Bee	07 Jan 2025	Copy of Judgement	—
OS/384/2024	Earneni Varshitha vs Gilla Ramesh	06 Jan 2025	Copy of Order	—
OS/494/2024	Anjuman Ara vs MRO Rajendranagar	06 Jan 2025	Copy of Judgement	—
CC/300045/2016	P.S.MOINABAD vs J RAGHAVAN	06 Jan 2025	Copy of Judgement	—
CC/300629/2016	P.S.MOINABAD vs BAIKANI KUMAR YADAV	06 Jan 2025	Copy of Judgement	—
CC/301200/2018	PS NARSINGI vs N.RAMUDU	03 Jan 2025	Copy of Judgement	—
CC/301368/2018	PS RAIDURGAM vs KONDAPALLY SRIKANTH	03 Jan 2025	Copy of Judgement	—
OS/705/2022	Ashok Kumar Singh vs Akhilesh Kumar Singh and others	02 Jan 2025	Copy of Order	—
OS/649/2023	Y. Venkata Satya Prasad vs Narsingi Municipality, Gandipet Mandal	24 Dec 2024	Copy of Judgement	—
OS/200060/2017	P.Haritha Priya vs Dasharath Ram Reddy	24 Dec 2024	Copy of Judgement	—
OS/30/2020	Qudsia Mazher Rep by GPA Holder Mohd Mazheruddin vs Mohammed Ibrahim Mazher	13 Dec 2024	Copy of Order	—
CC/978/2019	PS Raidurgam vs P karthik kumar	13 Dec 2024	Copy of Order	—
CC/300245/2017	P.S.NARSINGI vs MOHD KHALEELUDDIN	13 Dec 2024	Copy of Judgement	—
CC/300492/2017	Moinabad vs N.Mahinder Reddy	13 Dec 2024	Copy of Judgement	—
CC/300838/2017	P.S.NARSINGI vs LINGAREDDY JASWANTH REDDY	13 Dec 2024	Copy of Judgement	—
CC/301416/2018	PS RAIDURGAM vs KONDAPALLY SRIKANTH	13 Dec 2024	Copy of Judgement	—
OS/260/2024	Usha Agarwal vs Staywell Apartments LLP.	12 Dec 2024	Copy of Order	—
CC/1901/2023	State of Telangana PS RAIDURGAM vs Irfan shaik	12 Dec 2024	Copy of Judgement	—
CC/2089/2023	State of Telangana PS RAIDURGAM vs Irfan shaik	12 Dec 2024	Copy of Judgement	—
CC/300358/2017	PS NARSINGI vs GOUDICHERLA RAMULU	12 Dec 2024	Copy of Judgement	—
CC/300003/2017	Sarolla Ashok vs Abdul Khareem	11 Dec 2024	Copy of Judgement	—
OS/133/2024	Kodavali Mohan Rao vs The Tahsildar	05 Dec 2024	Copy of Judgement	—
OS/152/2024	Nandigama Vandana vs The Tahsildar	05 Dec 2024	Copy of Judgement	—
OS/470/2024	Ratna Choudhary vs All concerned	05 Dec 2024	Copy of Judgement	—
CC/2004/2022	State of TelanganaPS Narsingi vs Smt Tella Shilpa	05 Dec 2024	Copy of Order	—
CC/200233/2014	PS Narsingi vs M.Nizam ali khan and 2 others	05 Dec 2024	Copy of Judgement	—
CC/2088/2023	State of Telangana PS RAIDURGAM vs Irfan shaik	04 Dec 2024	Copy of Judgement	—
CC/301170/2018	P.S.RAIDURGAM vs BIKASH CHANDRA NAYAK	03 Dec 2024	Copy of Judgement	—

Showing 100 of 318 orders — Log in to browse all pages.

Monthly Orders (Last 12 Months)

Apr 2025		17
Mar 2025		20
Feb 2025		22
Jan 2025		25
Dec 2024		24
Nov 2024		21
Oct 2024		41
Sep 2024		20
Aug 2024		7
Jul 2024		1
Jun 2024		1
Apr 2024		2

Frequently Asked Questions

How many cases has Sri. Ankit Sarwa handled?

Sri. Ankit Sarwa has handled 326 court orders since 2023 at Rajendra Nagar, ADJ Court Complex. The average disposal rate is 14 orders per month.

What types of cases does Sri. Ankit Sarwa hear?

Based on available records, Sri. Ankit Sarwa primarily handles Criminal matters (Criminal Cases, Summary Trial Cases) and Civil matters (Original Suits) at Rajendra Nagar, ADJ Court Complex.

Where is Sri. Ankit Sarwa currently posted?

Sri. Ankit Sarwa is posted as III Additional Junior Civil Judge-cum-XXV Addl Judicial Magistrate of First Class RangaReddy District at Rajendrangar at Rajendra Nagar, ADJ Court Complex, Rangareddy, Telangana.

Are judgments by Sri. Ankit Sarwa available online?

Yes. 5 judgments by Sri. Ankit Sarwa are available on Legistro with full text, outcome, and sections cited.

How fast does Sri. Ankit Sarwa dispose cases?

Sri. Ankit Sarwa disposes approximately 14 cases per month, based on 326 orders handled over their tenure at Rajendra Nagar, ADJ Court Complex.

Since when is Sri. Ankit Sarwa serving?

Sri. Ankit Sarwa has been serving at Rajendra Nagar, ADJ Court Complex since 2023.

Case Types

CC 73%

OS 25%

STC 2%

PRC 0%

DVC 0%

Posting History

Feb 2025 — Apr 2025

III Additional Junior Civil Judge-cum-XXV Addl Judicial Magistrate of First Class RangaReddy District at Rajendrangar
Jun 2023 — Apr 2025

II Additional Junior Civil Judge-cum-XIII Addl. Judicial Magistrate of First Class, RangaReddy District at Rajendrangar · 326 orders

Outcomes on Record

Acquitted 1

Other Judges at this Court

Smt. Ch. Narmada

Principal Junior Civil Judge-cum-XI Addl.Judicial...

0 orders

Sri P.Naresh

I Additional Junior Civil Judge-cum-XII Addl. Judi...

318 orders

Mr. Daravath Uday Naik

II Additional Junior Civil Judge-cum-XIII Addl. Ju...

18 orders

Ms. T.Rathna Kumari

III Additional Junior Civil Judge-cum-XXV Addl Jud...

0 orders

Srinivas Thumkunta

Fast Track Special Judge for Trial and Disposal of...

15 orders

Smt.B.Aparna Devi

X Additional District and Sessions Judge RangaRedd...

3 orders

E.Sucharitha

Principal Senior Civil Judge Rajendranagar

9 orders

← View all judges at Rajendra Nagar, ADJ Court Complex