Sri. Arun Kumar Naram

IV JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE

HYD, City Civil Court Complex · Hyderabad · Telangana

SRI. ARUN KUMAR NARAM, IV JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE, is posted at HYD, City Civil Court Complex, Hyderabad, Telangana, India. 34 court orders on record since 2021. 10 judgments with full text available. Primarily handles OS, EP cases.

Total Orders

Judgments

Orders/Month

Postings

Featured Judgments

OS/1738/2019

B.Sai Raj Goud vs Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation

24 Jun 2022

IN THE COURT OF IV JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE, CITY CIVIL COURT, HYDERABAD.

PRESENT: SRI. ARUN KUMAR NARAM

IV JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE,

DATED THIS THE 24 TH DAY OF JUNE, 2022.

OS. NO. 1738 OF 2019

BETWEEN:- Mr. B. Sai Raj Goud, S/o Mr. B . Balraj Goud, Age 29 years, Occ: Director, M/s. BBG Breweries Private Limited, R/o H.No.8-2-293/82/A/1198, Plot No. 1198, Situated at Jubilee Hills Cooperative House Building Society Limited Road No.59, Jubliee Hills, Hyderabad.

...Plaintiff

AND

The Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation of Hyderabad, Represented By its Commissioner and Spl Officer, Having its Head Office at Municipal Complex, Tank Bund Road, Hyderabad.

...Defendant

Claim : This suit is filed by the Plaintiff Under Order VII Rule 1 R/w Section 26 of Code of Civil Procedure praying this Court to grant perpetual Injunction restraining the defendant corporation, its employees, subordinates, workmen or any other person or persons claiming through or acting under it from interfering with the repair work of the plaintiff or demolishing of the suit property or any part of the suit schedule property belonging to the plaintiff and to grant costs of the suit. This suit is coming before me for hearing in the presence of Sri. Gaurav Kwatra, Learnedcounsel for the Plaintiff and Sri. P.H. Pannaga Sai, Learned Standing counsel for Defendant and this Court made the following:-

JUDGMENT

Plaintiff called absent. Cost of Rs.200/- not paid. Counsel for plaintiff is present he represented that inspite of information given to the plaintiff about the date of hearing, the plaintiff did not turn up. Perused the docket proceedings which speaks that the suit is coming for plaintiff evidence since 21-01-2020 despite of the sufficient time and specific direction given to the plaintiff to file affidavit under Order XVIII Rule 4 of CPC, the plaintiff neither file the affidavit nor paid the cost, which shows that the plaintiff is not interested to prosecute the suit, in the above facts and circumstances and in view of the representation made by the counsel for the plaintiff as above, this court feels that the plaintiff is not interested to prosecute the suit, in this circumstances if the suit is adjourned further no purpose will be served except docket explosion, hence the suit is dismissed for want of prosecution.

Written and pronounced by me in the open court, this date 24 th Day of June, 2022.

IV JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE,

CITY CIVIL COURT: HYDERABAD.

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

WITNESSES EXAMINED

EXHIBITS MARKED

NIL

IV JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE,

CITY CIVIL COURT: HYDERABAD.

OS/705/2019

Mohd. Abdul Gafoor vs Padmasri Bhavana Samithi Rep by its President

28 Jun 2022

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

HYDERABAD.

PRESENT: SRI. ARUN KUMAR NARAM,

IV JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE.

DATED THIS THE 28 th DAY OF JUNE, 2022.

OS. NO. 705 OF 2019

Between: Mohd Abdul Gafoor, S/o Mohd Imamshah, Aged 46 years, Occ: Business, R/o.H.No.122396/A/1, Plot No.1, Markandeyanagar, Murad Nagar, Gudimalkapur, Hyderabad.

....Plaintiff

AND

1. PADMASRI BHAVANA SAMITHI, Markandeyanagar Development Association, Rep by its President, H.No. 122398, Markandeyanagar, Gudimalkapur, Hyderabad.

2. The Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation, Rep. By its commissioner, Having its Head Office at Municipal Complex, Tank bund Road, Hyderabad.

....Defendants

Claim:This suit is filed by the Plaintiff Under Order VII Rule 1 R/w Section 26 of Code of Civil Procedure praying this Court to grant perpetual injunction restraining the defendants and their henchmen, associates and representatives, subordinates, or any other person or persons claiming through or acting under them from interfering with the peaceful possession, works and enjoyment of plaintiff over the suit schedule property.

This suit is coming before me for final hearing in the presence of Sri K. Arvind Reddy,

Learned Counsel for Plaintiff and Sri Y. Seshagiri Rao and Learned Counsel for the

Defendant No.1 and P.H.Pannaga Sai Learned Counsel for the Defendant No.2 this Court made the following:

J U D G M E N T

Plaintiff called absent. Cost of Rs.100/ not paid. Counsel for plaintiff is present he represented that inspite of information given to the plaintiff about the date of hearing, the plaintiff did not turn up. Perused the docket proceedings which speaks that the suit is coming for trial since 04032020, despite of the sufficient time and specific direction given to the plaintiff to file affidavit under Order XVIII Rule 4 of

CPC, the plaintiff neither file the affidavit nor paid the cost, which shows that the plaintiff is not interested to prosecute the suit, in the above facts and circumstances and in view of the representation made by the counsel for the plaintiff as above, this court feels that the plaintiff is not interested to prosecute the suit, in this circumstances if the suit is adjourned further no purpose will be served except docket explosion, hence the suit is dismissed for want of prosecution.

Written and pronounced by me in the open Court on this the 28 th Day of June, 2022

IV JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE,

CITY CIVIL COURT: HYDERABAD.

OS/2049/2019

Sushma Jain vs Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation

24 Jun 2022

IN THE COURT OF IV JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE, CITY CIVIL COURT, HYDERABAD.

PRESENT: SRI. ARUN KUMAR NARAM

IV JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE,

DATED THE 24 th DAY OF JUNE, 2022.

OS. NO. 2049 OF 2019

BETWEEN:- Smt. Sushma Jain, W/o. Manoj Kumar, Aged 43 years, Occ :House Wife, Aged 55 years, Occ: Business, R/o.H.No. 23-6-951, Shah Ali Banda, Hyderabad.

...Plaintiff

AND

The Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation Represented By its Commissioner Having its Head Office at Municipal Complex, Tank Bund Road, Hyderabad.

...Defendant

Claim : This suit is filed by the plaintiff Under Order VII Rule 1 R/w Section 26 of Code of Civil Procedure praying this Court to grant Perpetual Injunction restraining the defendant Corporation, its employees, subordinates, workmen or any other person or persons claiming through or acting under it from interfering with the possession work or demolishing of the suit schedule property or any part of the suit property belonging to the plaintiff and to grant costs of the suit.

This suit is coming before me for hearing in the presence of Sri.M.Ranjith Kumar, learnedcounsel for the Plaintiffs and Sri.G. Venkata Ramana, Learned Standing counsel for Defendant and this Court made the following:-

JUDGMENT

Plaintiff called absent. Cost of Rs.100/- not paid. Counsel for plaintiff is present he represented that inspite of information given to the plaintiff about the date of hearing, the plaintiff did not turn up. Perused the docket proceedings which speaks that the suit is coming for trial since 08-01-2020 despite of the sufficient time and specific direction given to the plaintiff to file affidavit under Order XVIII Rule 4 of CPC, the plaintiff neither file the affidavit nor paid the cost, which shows that the plaintiff is not interested to prosecute the suit, in the above facts and circumstances and in view of the representation made by the counsel for the plaintiff as above, this court feels that the plaintiff is not interested to prosecute the suit, in this circumstances if the suit is adjourned further no purpose will be served except docket explosion, hence the suit is dismissed for want of prosecution. Written and pronounced by me in the open court, this date 24 th Day of June, 2022.

IV JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE,

CITY CIVIL COURT: HYDERABAD.

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

WITNESSES EXAMINED

EXHIBITS MARKED

NIL

IV JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE,

CITY CIVIL COURT: HYDERABAD.

OS/2712/2019

Shaik Abdul Sakir vs Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation

21 Jun 2022

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

HYDERABAD.

PRESENT: SRI. ARUN KUMAR NARAM,

IV JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE.

DATED THIS THE 21 st DAY OF JUNE, 2022.

OS. NO. 2712 OF 2019

Between:f1955

1. Shaik Abdul Sakir S/o Shaik Abdul Wadud, Aged 39 years, Occ: Business

2. Shaik Zakir S/o Shaik Abdul Wadud, Aged 36 years, Occ: Business, Both R/o.225754, Chowk Maidan Khan, Hyderabad.

....Plaintiffs

AND

The, Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation, Rep. By its commissioner, Having its Office at Municipal Complex, Tank bund Road, Hyderabad.

....Defendant

Claim:This suit is filed by the Plaintiff Under Order VII Rule 1 R/w Section 26 of Code of Civil Procedure praying this Court to grant perpetual injunction restraining the defendant corporation, its employees, subordinates, workmen or any other person or persons claiming through or acting under it from interfering with the construction , work or demolishing of the suit schedule property or any part of the suit property either in whole or in part.

This suit is coming before me for final hearing in the presence of Sri D. Uma

Maheshwar, Learned Counsel for Plaintiffs and Sri G. Gopala Chary andLearned Counsel for the Defendant and this Court made the following:

J U D G M E N T

Plaintiffs called absent. Counsel for plaintiffs is present he represented that inspite of information given to the plaintiffs about the date of hearing, the plaintiffs did not turn up. Perused the docket proceedings which speaks that the suit is coming for trial since 20-04-2021 despite of the sufficient time and specific direction given to the plaintiffs to file affidavit under Order XVIII Rule 4 of CPC, the plaintiffs neither file the affidavit nor paid the cost, which shows that the plaintiffs are not interested to prosecute the suit, in the above facts and circumstances and in view of the representation made by the counsel for the plaintiffs as above, this court feels that the plaintiff is not interested to prosecute the suit, in this circumstances if the suit is adjourned further no purpose will be served except docket explosion, hence the suit is dismissed for want of prosecution.

Written and pronounced by me in the open Court on this the 21 st Day of June,

2022

IV JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE,

CITY CIVIL COURT: HYDERABAD.

OS/1971/2019

Dharmender Bhatia vs Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation

01 Jul 2022

IN THE COURT OF IV JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE, CITY CIVIL COURT, HYDERABAD.

PRESENT: SRI. ARUN KUMAR NARAM

IV JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE,

DATED THIS THE 01 ST DAY OF JULY, 2022.

OS. NO. 1971 OF 2019

BETWEEN:- 1.Dharmender Bhatia S/o Parmanand Bhatia, Aged 52 years, Occ: Business,

2. Sri. Bhoj Raj, S/o Late Inder Bhan, Aged 81 years, Occ: Retired Employee, Both are R/o Flat No. 203, H.No. 3-4-379, SV Basath Apartments Kachiguda, Hyderabad.

...Plaintiffs

AND

The Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation of Hyderabad, Represented By its Commissioner and Spl Officer, Having its Head Office at Municipal Complex, Tank Bund Road, Hyderabad.

...Defendant

This suit is coming before me for hearing in the presence of Sri. Duggu Uma Maheshwar, Learned counsel for the Plaintiff and Sri. G. Gopala Chary, Learned Standing counsel for Defendant and this Court made the following:-

JUDGMENT

Plaintiffs called absent. Cost of Rs.100/- not paid. Counsel for plaintiffs are present he represented that inspite of information given to the plaintiffs about the date of hearing, the plaintiffs did not turn up. Perused the docket proceedings which speaks that the the stage of the suit is coming for trial since 08-04-2020, despite of sufficient time has been given, the Plaintiffs neither appear before the Court nor filed affidavit under Order XVIII Rule 4 of CPC, which shows that the plaintiffs are not interested to prosecute the suit, in these circumstances and in view of the representation made by the counsel for plaintiffs has above, if the suit is adjourned further no purpose will be served, except docket explosion, hence the suit is dismissed for want of prosecution.

Written and pronounced by me in the open court, this date 01 st Day of July, 2022.

IV JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE,

CITY CIVIL COURT: HYDERABAD.

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

WITNESSES EXAMINED

EXHIBITS MARKED

NIL

IV JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE,

CITY CIVIL COURT: HYDERABAD.

Order Record 34 total

Case No.	Parties	Date	Type	Outcome
EP/109/2023	M/s. Margadarsi Schit Fund Pvt Ltd., vs M/s. Premier Poultry Products Ltd.,	21 Apr 2023	Order	—
OS/1829/2019	Nikhil Arora vs Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation	31 Mar 2023	Order	—
EP/498/2022	M/s Margadarsi Chit Fund Pvt Ltd vs Vanam Srinivasulu	29 Mar 2023	Order	—
EP/46/2021	M/s. ANG Chit Fund Pvt Ltd vs Dr. G. Varaprasad Rao	20 Feb 2023	Order	—
OS/5277/2022	MOHAMMED ABDUL ZAKER vs The Deputy Commissioner GHMC	08 Feb 2023	Order	—
EP/714/2022	M/s Margadarsi Chit Fund Pvt Ltd vs GADIYARAM SATYAM	21 Dec 2022	Order	—
OS/2841/2019	Mohd Saleem @ Ibrahim vs Abdul Muqtar	10 Nov 2022	Order	—
OS/2227/2018	Mr. J. Jai Prakash Singh vs Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation	03 Nov 2022	Issues	—
OS/2133/2018	MOHD. SHAFIUDDIN vs Md. Irfan Khan	27 Oct 2022	Order	—
EP/294/2021	M/s Margadarsi Chit Fund Pvt Ltd vs T. Srinivas	19 Oct 2022	Order	—
EP/747/2022	M/s. Shriram Chits Pvt Ltd vs A. RAMA KRISHNA	19 Oct 2022	Order	—
OS/3068/2021	A.K.SYJ Comlex Association vs Turab Ali Khan	19 Oct 2022	Order	—
EP/376/2021	M/s Margadarsi Chit Fund Pvt Ltd vs U. Vinod Kumar	19 Sep 2022	Order	—
OS/1971/2019	Dharmender Bhatia vs Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation	01 Jul 2022	Order	—
OS/705/2019	Mohd. Abdul Gafoor vs Padmasri Bhavana Samithi Rep by its President	28 Jun 2022	Issues	—
OS/1738/2019	B.Sai Raj Goud vs Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation	24 Jun 2022	Order	—
OS/2049/2019	Sushma Jain vs Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation	24 Jun 2022	Order	—
OS/2712/2019	Shaik Abdul Sakir vs Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation	21 Jun 2022	Issues	—
OS/2155/2019	Moohammed Wasif Akther vs Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation	17 Jun 2022	Order	—
OS/2015/2019	Fatima Zehra vs Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation	16 Jun 2022	Order	—
OS/2204/2018	MOHD. MAQSOOD ALI vs Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation	29 Apr 2022	Order	—
OS/1869/2021	Palasam Enesh Kumar vs Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation	28 Apr 2022	Order	—
OS/857/2018	MADDULURI MALA KONDAIAH vs Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation	22 Apr 2022	Order	—
OS/1683/2018	SMT. G. ANIL KUMARI vs Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation	20 Apr 2022	Issues	—
EP/300001/2018	SOMA SESHAIAH vs MANDUGULA SRINIVAS GOUD	18 Apr 2022	Order	—
OS/2624/2019	I.Ankush Rao vs Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation	18 Apr 2022	Order	—
OS/2647/2019	Sri. Kona Malikarjuna Rao vs Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation	12 Apr 2022	Order	—
OS/2238/2018	MOHAMMED MAHIR ALAM KHAN vs Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation	11 Apr 2022	Order	—
OS/1882/2019	G.Anil Kumar vs Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation	08 Apr 2022	Order	—
OS/1664/2019	G.Vallabh Reddy vs Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation	04 Apr 2022	Order	—
OS/1781/2019	Mukesh Agarwal vs Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation	04 Apr 2022	Order	—
OS/2278/2019	Hitesh Kumar Jain vs Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation	04 Apr 2022	Order	—
OS/2454/2019	Karemunnisa Begum vs Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation	04 Apr 2022	Order	—
OS/2479/2019	Beatrice Francis vs Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation	04 Apr 2022	Order	—

Monthly Orders (Last 12 Months)

Apr 2023		1
Mar 2023		2
Feb 2023		2
Dec 2022		1
Nov 2022		2
Oct 2022		4
Sep 2022		1
Jul 2022		1
Jun 2022		6
Apr 2022		14

Frequently Asked Questions

How many cases has SRI. ARUN KUMAR NARAM handled?

SRI. ARUN KUMAR NARAM has handled 34 court orders since 2021 at HYD, City Civil Court Complex. The average disposal rate is 2 orders per month.

What types of cases does SRI. ARUN KUMAR NARAM hear?

Based on available records, SRI. ARUN KUMAR NARAM primarily handles Civil matters (Original Suits, Execution Petitions) at HYD, City Civil Court Complex.

Where is SRI. ARUN KUMAR NARAM currently posted?

SRI. ARUN KUMAR NARAM is posted as IV JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE at HYD, City Civil Court Complex, Hyderabad, Telangana.

Are judgments by SRI. ARUN KUMAR NARAM available online?

Yes. 10 judgments by SRI. ARUN KUMAR NARAM are available on Legistro with full text, outcome, and sections cited.

How fast does SRI. ARUN KUMAR NARAM dispose cases?

SRI. ARUN KUMAR NARAM disposes approximately 2 cases per month, based on 34 orders handled over their tenure at HYD, City Civil Court Complex.

Since when is SRI. ARUN KUMAR NARAM serving?

SRI. ARUN KUMAR NARAM has been serving at HYD, City Civil Court Complex since 2021.

Case Types

OS 76%

EP 24%

Posting History

Sep 2022 — May 2023

IV JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE · 13 orders
Apr 2022 — May 2022

II JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE
Apr 2022 — Jul 2022

IV JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE · 21 orders
Nov 2021 — Dec 2021

IV JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE

Other Judges at this Court

Sri. S Sasidhar Reddy

CHIEF JUDGE

1,099 orders

Smt. Y. Padma

II ADDITIONAL CHIEF JUDGE

1,069 orders

Manisha Sravan Unnam

III ADDITIONAL CHIEF JUDGE

0 orders

Sri. K. Murali Mohan

IX ADDITIONAL CHIEF JUDGE

121 orders

Sri. Ch. Jithendhar

X ADDITIONAL CHIEF JUDGE

299 orders

Smt. P.lakshmi Kumari

XI ADDITIONAL CHIEF JUDGE

1 orders

Smt. M. Padmaja

XIV ADDITIONAL CHIEF JUDGE

1,179 orders

Sri. D.v. Nageswara Rao

XXV ADDL CHIEF JUDGE

1,759 orders

Smt. Vempati Aparna

XXVI ADDITIONAL CHIEF JUDGE

14 orders

Ms. Shalini Lingam

II JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE

86 orders

Smt. Putta Mounika

III JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE

5 orders

Ms. K.Keerthana

IV JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE

20 orders

Ms. G.Girija

V JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE

36 orders

Ms. Anamika

VI JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE

670 orders

Ms. K.Bindu

VII JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE

137 orders

Ms. B.Manasa

VIII JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE

64 orders

Smt. B. Kalpana

IX JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE

210 orders

Smt. Arisha Nusrat

X JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE

2 orders

Sri. Rama Chandra Rao Nadendla

XIX JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE

339 orders

Gopi Krishna Kumaram

XXI JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE

0 orders

Sri C.suresh

I SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE

344 orders

Sri. B. Rama Rao

II SENIOR CIVIL JUGDE

45 orders

Sri. G. Uday Kumar

THE PRL. SPECIAL COURT IN THE CADRE OF DISTRICT JU...

48 orders

Sri. N. Venkat Ram

ADDL. SPECIAL COURT IN THE CADRE OF DISTRICT JUDGE...

19 orders

← View all judges at HYD, City Civil Court Complex