Sri C.K.V.Satyakanth Kumar

APCH080001262026Page No.1O.S.No.29 of 2026, I A.C.J. [J.D.] Court, Tirupati,

Dt. 30.04.2026.

IN THE COURT OF THE FIRST ADDITIONAL CIVIL JUDGE

[JUNIOR DIVISION], TIRUPATI.

PRESENT: SRI C.K.V.SATYAKANTH KUMAR, First Additional Civil Judge [Junior Division], Tirupati.

Thursday, this the Thirtieth [30th] day of April, 2026.

ORIGINAL SUIT No.29 of 2026

Between :

P.Murali Mohan Reddy, S/o. P.Venkata Reddy, Hindu, aged about 50 years,

T.T.D. Employee, residing at D.No.5-25/D, Perumallapalli Village and Post,

Tirupati Rural Mandal, Tirupati District, Aadhar No.7935 8611 9105, Mobile

No.7989366392, No E-mail ID, within the Jurisdiction of this Court.

… Plaintiff.

And

S.Munar Basha, S/o. S.Mahammad Rashi, Muslim, aged about 29 years,

Auto Driver, residing at D.No.23/143, B.D.Colony, Chandragiri Town, Post and Mandal, Tirupati District, Aadhar No.9695 5869 0681, Mobile

No.9177881084, E-mail ID not known to the Plaintiff, within the Jurisdiction of this Court.

… Defendant. * * * This Suit, coming before me, on 29.04.2026, for Plaintiff

Evidence, and thereafter for Hearing of the Plaintiff, in the presence of Sri

N.Hari Babu, Advocate for the Plaintiff, and the Defendant having been set

Exparte, for his failure to appear before this Court, inspite of service of Suit

Summons served upon him; and upon hearing the Advocate for the Plaintiff;

O.S.No.29 of 2026Page No.2I A.C.J. [J.D.] Court,

Dt. 30.04.2026.Tirupati.

and upon perusing the entire material available on record; and upon having been stood over for consideration till this day, this Court delivered the following

JUDGMENT

1.This Suit is filed by the Plaintiff, against the Defendant, for recovery of the Suit amount of Rs.3,25,466/-, being the Principal of

Rs.2,00,000/- and interest of Rs.1,25,466/- due on the Promissory Note,

dated 15.05.2023, executed by the Defendant, in favour of the Plaintiff, along

with interest at 24% per annum from the date of Suit till the date of realization, and for the Costs of the Suit, from the Defendant.

2.The averments in the Plaint, in brief, are as follows:-

The Defendant herein has borrowed an amount of Rs.2,00,000/- (Rupees Two Lakhs only) from the Plaintiff on 15.05.2023, for his family necessities, and in consideration of the same, the Defendant has executed a demand Promissory Note in favour of the Plaintiff on the same day promising to repay the same with interest at the rate of 24% P.A, on demand or Order.

Inspite of oral demands made by the Plaintiff, the Defendant did not choose to repay the amount due under the Pronote, the Plaintiff got issued a Legal Notice, dated 07.11.2025, to the Defendant, and the same was acknowledged by the Defendant, but he neither replied nor complied the demands of the said Notice. Hence, the Suit.

The Defendant is not an Agriculturist and he is not entitled for scaling down the interest under Act VII/ 1977 etc.

3.The Suit Summons, issued to the Defendant, through Court is received by the Defendant. On 27.02.2026, Defendant called absent. No representation for Defendant till 3.30 PM. Service of Summons on Defendant is held sufficient. Hence, the Defendant is set Exparte on the same day, i.e.,

O.S.No.29 of 2026Page No.3I A.C.J. [J.D.] Court,

Dt. 30.04.2026.Tirupati.

on 27.02.2026.

4.On behalf of the Plaintiff, PW.1 is examined, and Exhibit A1 to

A3 are marked.

5.Heard the Arguments on behalf of the Plaintiff.

6.The Point for consideration iswhether the Plaintiff is entitled

for recovery of the Suit amount, along with subsequent interest and

Costs, from the Defendant, as prayed for ?

7. POINT:-

(a) In order to establish his contentions, the Plaintiff has examined himself as PW.1, and marked Exhibits A1 to A3 are marked on his behalf. PW.1 had deposed in his Chief Examination Affidavit, on par with the averments in the Plaint. It is clear from the record that the Defendant had remained Ex-parte to the Proceedings of the Suit, for his failure to appear

before the Court. As such, it can be said that the evidence of PW.1 had

remained unchallenged and undiscredited. On account of the above said conduct of the Defendant, an adverse inference can be drawn against him, to the effect that he had admitted the Case of the Plaintiff, and that he has nothing to put forth as a contest for the same.

(b) It is relevant to look into Ex.A1 to A3 which are relied upon by the Plaintiff. Ex.A1 is the Promissory Note, dated 15.05.2023, executed by the Defendant in favour of the Plaintiff, for Rs.2,00,000/-. As seen from

Ex.A1, it was attested by two persons, namely K.Madan Mohan Reddy and

N.Chandra Sekhar Reddy, and it was Scribed by E.Parandham, and the

Borrower, i.e., the Defendant had signed twice in Ex.A1, i.e., upon and below the Two Revenue Stamps affixed in Ex.A1. It shows that the amount was borrowed by the\ Defendant to meet his family necessities, and that the rate of interest is Rs.2/- per Rs.100/- per month, i.e., 24% per annum.

O.S.No.29 of 2026Page No.4I A.C.J. [J.D.] Court,

Dt. 30.04.2026.Tirupati.

(c) Ex.A2 is the Office Copy of the Legal Notice, dated 07.11.2025, got issued by the Plaintiff to the Defendant, along with Postal

Receipt. As seen from the Document in Ex.A1, the Plaintiff has demanded the Defendant for discharge of the debt covered under the Ex.A1. Ex.A3 is the Postal Acknowledgment, received from the Defendant, with regard to the

Ex.A2. As seen from the Document in Ex.A3, one Anwar has received Legal

Notice in Ex.A2.

(d) By virtue of the unchallenged evidence of PW.1, coupled with Ex.A1 to A3, this Court is of the opinion that the Plaintiff had established his contentions that the Defendant had borrowed amount from him, and executed the Suit Promissory Note in Ex.A1, and the Defendant failed to pay the Principal or interest, and hence, the Plaintiff got issued Legal Notice in

Ex.A2, calling upon him to repay the Suit amount, and hence, the Defendant is liable to pay the Suit amount of Rs.3,25,466/- due towards the Suit

Promissory Note in Ex.A1. This Court is of the opinion that the interest from the date of filing of the Suit till the date of the Decree can be awarded at 12% per annum, while the interest from the date of the Decree till the date of realization, can be awarded at 6% per annum, on the Principal amount of

Rs.2,00,000/-, and that the said amount is quite reasonable.

(e) In view of the above discussion, this Court concludes and holds that the Plaintiff is entitled to recover the Suit amount of Rs.3,25,466/-, along with subsequent interest at 12% per annum from the date of presentation of the Suit, till the date of Decree, and thereafter, with future interest at 6% per annum from the date of Decree till the date of realization, on the Principal amount of Rs.2,00,000/-, along with the Costs of the Suit, from the Defendant, as prayed for by him.

Hence, the Point is answered in favour of the Plaintiff.

O.S.No.29 of 2026Page No.5I A.C.J. [J.D.] Court,

Dt. 30.04.2026.Tirupati.

8.In the result, the Suit is decreed with Costs, directing the

Defendant, to pay the Plaintiff, a sum of Rs.3,25,466/-, along with subsequent interest at 12% per annum from the date of presentation of the

Suit, till the date of Decree, and thereafter, with future interest at 6% per annum from the date of Decree till the date of realization, on the Principal amount of Rs.2,00,000/-.

Typed by the Stenographer, to my Dictation, and corrected and

pronounced by me in the open Court, on this the 30 th day of April, 2026.

(Sd/- C.K.V.Satyakanth Kumar), First Additional Civil Judge [Junior Division], Tirupati.

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

WITNESSES EXAMINED ON BEHALF OF THE PLAINTIFF

PW.1 : P.Murali Mohan Reddy.

WITNESSES EXAMINED ON BEHALF OF THE DEFENDANT

None.

EXHIBITS MARKED ON BEHALF OF THE PLAINTIFF

Ex.A1 : Promissory Note, dated 15.05.2023, executed by the Defendant in favour of the Plaintiff, for Rs.2,00,000/-. Ex.A2 : Office Copy of the Legal Notice, dated 07.11.2025, got issued by the Plaintiff to the Defendant, along with Postal Receipt. Ex.A3 : Postal Acknowledgment, received from the Defendant, with regard to the Ex.A2.

EXHIBITS MARKED ON BEHALF OF THE DEFENDANT

Nil.

(Sd/- C.K.V.Satyakanth Kumar), First Additional Civil Judge [Junior Division], Tirupati.

//True Copy// (Sd/- C.K.V.Satyakanth Kumar), First Additional Civil Judge [Junior Division], Tirupati.

O.S.No.29 of 2026Page No.6I A.C.J. [J.D.] Court,

Dt. 30.04.2026.Tirupati.

Fair Judgment

O.S.No.29 of 2026

Dt. 30.04.2026.

Part - I

APCH080012672025Page No.1O.S.No.194 of 2025, I A.C.J. [J.D.] Court, Tirupati,

Dt. 04.05.2026.

IN THE COURT OF THE FIRST ADDITIONAL CIVIL JUDGE

[JUNIOR DIVISION], TIRUPATI.

PRESENT: SRI C.K.V.SATYAKANTH KUMAR, First Additional Civil Judge [Junior Division], Tirupati.

Monday, this the Fourth [04th] day of May, 2026.

ORIGINAL SUIT No.194 of 2025

Between :

M.Ramachandra Reddy, S/o. Late Muni Venkataramana Reddy, Hindu, aged about 74 years, Retired Employee, residing at D.No.2-212/A, T.T.D. Plots,

M.R.Palle, Tirupati Urban Mandal, Tirupati District, within the jurisdiction of this Court. (Aadhar Card No.7545 4192 7952) Ph:9052711233.

… Plaintiff.

And

D.Yamuna Krishna, D/o. Late D.Ramu, Hindu, aged about 40 years,

Housewife, residing at D.No.7-10/7, Gandhipuram, near Vaikuntapuram,

Tirupati Rural Mandal, Tirupati District, within the jurisdiction of this Court.

Aadhar No.3610 7753 7211.

… Defendant.

* * *

This Suit, coming on 30.04.2026, for the Evidence of the Plaintiff

before me, in the presence of Sri Bavanasi Chenchu Kumar, Advocate for

the Plaintiff, and the Defendant having been set Exparte, for his failure to appear before this Court, inspite of Service of Suit Summons by way of

Paper Publication; and upon hearing the Advocate for the Plaintiff; and upon

O.S.No.194 of 2025Page No.2I A.C.J. [J.D.] Court,

Dt. 04.05.2026.Tirupati.

perusing the entire material available on record; and upon having been stood over for consideration till this day, this Court delivered the following

JUDGMENT

1.This Suit is filed by the Plaintiff, against the Defendant, for recovery of the Suit amount of Rs.1,72,000/-, being the Principal of

Rs.1,00,000/- and interest of Rs.72,000/- due on the Promissory Note, dated 09.03.2025, executed by the Defendant, in favour of the Plaintiff, along with interest at 24% per annum from the date of Suit till the date of realization, and for the Costs of the Suit, from the Defendant.

2.The averments in the Plaint, in brief, are as follows:-

The Defendant has borrowed a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees

One Lakh only) on 09.03.2022, from the Plaintiff for the purpose of family and other expenses, and in consideration thereof on the even date, the

Defendant has executed the demand Promissory Note in favour of the

Plaintiff promising to repay the same together with interest at 24% per annum to the Plaintiff on demand or to his order.

The Plaintiff orally demanded several times for repayment of the above said Pronote amount along with interest, and the Defendant has been postponing the same for the reasons best known to them. Under the above circumstances, the Plaintiff is obliged to file the present Suit for recovery of

Pronote amount along with interest from the Defendant.

The Defendant is a housewife and not an Agriculturist, as such, she is not entitled to the benefits under Agriculture Debt Relief Act, IV of 1938 & Act VII of 1977 or such other benefits.

3.The Suit Summons issued to the Defendant, through Court and

Post were returned with an endorsement of ‘Addressee cannot be located’.

Hence, on 14.11.2025, Steps were ordered by this Court. On 10.12.2025,

O.S.No.194 of 2025Page No.3I A.C.J. [J.D.] Court,

Dt. 04.05.2026.Tirupati.

the Plaintiff has filed a Petition, under Order 5 Rule 20 of C.P.C., and it was allowed, and Publication of the Summons to the Defendant was ordered to be made in Eenadu Telugu Daily News Paper, Tirupati District Edition,

Tirupati as a Substitute Service. Publication was issued, and a Copy of

Publication was filed before the Court on 18.03.2026, the Defendant failed to appear before the Court, and there was no representation on behalf of the

Defendant till 04:30 PM. Hence, the Defendant is set Exparte on the same day, i.e., on 18.03.2026.

4.On behalf of the Plaintiff, PW.1 is examined, and Exhibit A1 is marked.

5.Heard the Arguments on behalf of the Plaintiff.

6.The Point for consideration iswhether the Plaintiff is entitled

for recovery of the Suit amount, along with subsequent interest and

Costs, from the Defendant, as prayed for?

7. POINT:-

(a) In order to establish his contentions, the Plaintiff has examined himself as PW.1, and marked Exhibit A1 on his behalf. PW.1 had deposed in his Chief Examination Affidavit, on par with the averments in the

Plaint. It is clear from the Record that the Defendant had remained Exparte to the Proceedings of the Suit, and failed to appear before the Court, inspite of Suit Summons by way of Paper Publication. As such, it can be said that the evidence of PW.1 had remained unchallenged and undiscredited. On account of the above said conduct of the Defendant, an adverse inference can be drawn against him, to the effect that he had admitted the Case of the

Plaintiff, and that he has nothing to put forth as a contest for the same.

(b) It is relevant to look into Ex.A1 which is relied upon by the

Plaintiff. Ex.A1 is the Promissory Note, dated 09.03.2025, executed by the

O.S.No.194 of 2025Page No.4I A.C.J. [J.D.] Court,

Dt. 04.05.2026.Tirupati.

Defendant in favour of the Plaintiff, for Rs.1,00,000/-. As seen from Ex.A1, it was attested by two persons, namely P.Padma, and anotehr name is not legible, and it was scribed by A.Sushmitha, and that the Borrower, i.e., the

Defendant had signed twice in Ex.A1, i.e., upon the Revenue Stamp affixed in Ex.A1. It shows that the amount was borrowed to meet the family and other expenses, and that the rate of interest is Rs.2/- per Rs.100/- per month, i.e., 24% per annum.

(c) By virtue of the unchallenged evidence of PW.1, coupled with Ex.A1, this Court is of the opinion that the Plaintiff had established his contentions that the Defendant had borrowed amount from him, and executed the Suit Promissory Note in Ex.A1, and hence, the Defendant is liable to pay the Suit amount of Rs.1,72,000/- due towards the Suit

Promissory Note in Ex.A1, along with the subsequent interest and Costs of the Suit. This Court is of the opinion that the interest from the date of filing of the Suit till the date of the Decree can be awarded at 12% per annum, while the interest from the date of the Decree till the date of realization, can be awarded at 6% per annum, on the Principal amount of Rs.1,00,000/-, and that the said amount is quite reasonable.

(d) In view of the above discussion, this Court concludes and holds that the Plaintiff is entitled to recover the Suit amount of Rs.1,72,000/-, along with subsequent interest at 12% per annum from the date of presentation of the Suit, till the date of Decree, and thereafter, with future interest at 6% per annum from the date of Decree till the date of realization, on the Principal amount of Rs.1,00,000/-, along with the Costs of the Suit, from the Defendant, as prayed for by him.

Hence, the Point is answered in favour of the Plaintiff.

O.S.No.194 of 2025Page No.5I A.C.J. [J.D.] Court,

Dt. 04.05.2026.Tirupati.

8.In the result, the Suit is decreed with Costs, directing the

Defendant, to pay the Plaintiff, a sum of Rs.1,72,000/-, along with subsequent interest at 12% per annum from the date of presentation of the

Suit, till the date of Decree, and thereafter, with future interest at 6% per annum from the date of Decree till the date of realization, on the Principal amount of Rs.1,00,000/-.

Typed by the Stenographer, to my Dictation, and corrected and

pronounced by me in the open Court, on this the 18 th day of March, 2026.

(Sd/- C.K.V.Satyakanth Kumar), First Additional Civil Judge [Junior Division], Tirupati.

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

WITNESSES EXAMINED ON BEHALF OF THE PLAINTIFF

PW.1 : M.Ramachandra Reddy.

WITNESSES EXAMINED ON BEHALF OF THE DEFENDANT

None.

EXHIBITS MARKED ON BEHALF OF THE PLAINTIFF

Ex.A1 : Original Promissory Note, dated 09.03.2025, executed by the

Defendant in favour of the Plaintiff, for Rs.1,00,000/-.

EXHIBITS MARKED ON BEHALF OF THE DEFENDANT

Nil.

(Sd/- C.K.V.Satyakanth Kumar), First Additional Civil Judge [Junior Division], Tirupati.

//True Copy// (Sd/- C.K.V.Satyakanth Kumar), First Additional Civil Judge [Junior Division], Tirupati.

O.S.No.194 of 2025Page No.6I A.C.J. [J.D.] Court,

Dt. 04.05.2026.Tirupati.

Fair Judgment

O.S.No.194 of 2025

Dt. 04.05.2026.

Part - I

APCH080043912025

IN THE COURT OF THE FIRST ADDITIONAL CIVIL JUDGE [JUNIOR DIVISION] :: TIRUPATI

PRESENT: C.K.V. SATYAKANTH KUMAR, First Additional Civil Judge [ Junior Division ], Tirupati. Wednesday, this the Sixth (06th ) day of May, 2026

Original Suit No. 768 of 2025

Between : L.Naresh, S/o L.Lakshmaiah, Hindu, aged about 43 years, Residing at D.No.6-13-56, Ambedkar Colony, Tirupati Town, Tirupati District. … PLAINTIFF.

And

M.Mallika, W/o late M.Chandra Babu, Hindu, aged about 62 years, Residing at D.No.2- 2-307, Chinthakayala Street, Back side of Crime Police Station, Tiruapti. … DEFENDANT.

This suit filed by the Plaintiff, for directing the Defendant to execute the Registered Sale Deed for Plaint Schedule Property in favour of the Plaintiff in pursuance of Agreement of Sale, dated 24.06.2024 after receipt of Balance amount of Rs.4,50,000/- and if the Defendant fails to do so the Court may be pleased to execute Registered Sale Deed for the Plaint Schedule Property in favour of the Plaintiff; and for Costs of the Suit. This suit coming on 06.05.2026 before me for filing of Written Statement, in the presence of Sri V.Krishna Reddy, Advocate for the Plaintiff; and Sri S.M.Jahn, Advocate for Defendant; and upon perusing the entire material available on record; and upon having been stood over for consideration till this day, this Court delivered the following:

J U D G M E N T

Plaintiff is present. Counsel for Plaintiff filed a Memo stating that in the presence of elders, the matter is settled, and prayed to dismiss the Suit as not press. Memo is signed by Plaintiff and the counsel for Plaintiff. Notice received by the counsel for Defendant, and did not endorsed any objection. Memo is recorded. Considering the Memo filed by the Plaintiff, this Court is inclined to Dismiss the Suit as not press. Hence, the Suit is Dismissed as not pressed. No Costs

Pronounced by me in the open Court this the 06 th day of May, 2026.

(Sd/- C.K.V. SATYAKANTH KUMAR)

First Additional Civil Judge,

[ Junior Division ], Tirupati.

// 2 //

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

NIL.

//Attested//(Sd/- C.K.V. SATYAKANTH KUMAR)

First Additional Civil Judge,

(Sd/- C.K.V. SATYAKANTH KUMAR)

[ Ju

First Additional Civil Judge,

nior Division ], Tirupati.

[ Junior Division ], Tirupati.

APCH080032292023

IN THE COURT OF THE FIRST ADDITIONAL CIVIL JUDGE [JUNIOR DIVISION] :: TIRUPATI

PRESENT: C.K.V. SATYAKANTH KUMAR, First Additional Civil Judge [ Junior Division ], Tirupati. Monday, this the Eleventh (11th ) day of May, 2026

Original Suit No. 709 of 2023

Between : ICICI Bank Limited, a Banking Company incorporated under the provisions of companies Act, 1956 having its Registered Office at Mumbai and various branches across the Country and one of its Branch is situated at Tirupati, Represented by its Authorized Signatory and Power of Attorney holder Sanka Bathula Lakshmipathi, S/o Naga Satyanarayana, age 29 years, Relation Manager, Hyderabad. … PLAINTIFF.

And

Paipalle Meghanath Reddy, S/o Jayarama Reddy Paipalli, aged 56 years, Private Employee, Resident of D.No.6-12, Dwarakapuram, Thavanampalle, Punyasamudram, Kanipakam, Beside Aganadi Scheool, Chittoor – 517131. … DEFENDANT.

This suit filed by the Plaintiff Bank to grant Suit Claim of Rs.6,96,560.07ps. and to award subsequent Interest @ 24% p.a. on Suit Claim from the date of filing of the Suit till the the date of realization of the Suit amount of Rs.6,96,560.07ps; and for Costs of the Suit. This suit coming on 11.05.2026 before me for Plaintiff Evidence, in the presence of Sri B.Naveen Kumar, Advocate for the Plaintiff Bank; and the Defendant is having been set Exparte; and upon perusing the entire material available on record; and upon having been stood over for consideration till this day, this Court delivered the following:

J U D G M E N T

For Plaintiff Evidence, no representation for Plaintiff till 3.45 PM. Cost of Rs.500/- is not paid. Inspite of conditional Order of this Court, Plaintiff did not appear before this Court, and proceed with the Case. Hence, the Suit is dismissed for default.

Pronounced by me in the open Court this the 11 th day of May, 2026.

(Sd/- C.K.V. SATYAKANTH KUMAR)

First Additional Civil Judge,

[ Junior Division ], Tirupati.

// 2 //

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

NIL.

//Attested//(Sd/- C.K.V. SATYAKANTH KUMAR)

First Additional Civil Judge,

(Sd/- C.K.V. SATYAKANTH KUMAR)

[ Junior Division ], Tirupati.

First Additional Civil Judge, [ Junior Division ], Tirupati.

APCH080013142026

IN THE COURT OF THE FIRST ADDITIONAL CIVIL JUDGE [JUNIOR

DIVISION] :: TIRUPATI

RESENT: C.K.V. SATYAKANTH KUMAR,

First Additional Civil Judge [ Junior Division ], Tirupati.

Wednesday, this the Twenty Ninth [29th ] day of April, 2026

E.P.No. 98 of 2026

O.S.No.548 of 2018

Between : S.Venkataramana Reddy, S/o late S.Narayana Reddy, Hindu, aged 60 … Plaintiff/ years, Residing at D.No.1-35, Kuchivaripalli, Chandrgiri Mandal, D.Hr. Tirupati District. And : D.Gopi Krishna, S/o D/Subramanyam Reddy, Hindu, aged 44 years,

.. Defendant/

Residing at Flat No.103, New Balaji Colony, Tirupati, Tirupati District. J.Dr Prays to issue Rule 22 Notice and issue Sale Notice, issue Proclamation and Order for public auction under Order 21 Rule 64 & 66 of CPC and direct for payment of the Decree amount, subsequent interest and Cost of the EP. This execution petition coming on 29.04.2026, before me for Arrest of J.Dr in the presence of Sri M.Harish, Advocate for D.Hr; and this Court delivered the following; -: O R D E R :-

As per Orders in E.A.No.51 of 2026, dated 29.04.2026, EP No.98 of 2026 is advanced from 17.06.2026 to this day, i.e., on 29.04.2026. Both parties are present. Full Satisfaction Memo filed by the D.Hr stating that, the D.Hr has received the entire E.P. Amount from the J.Dr towards full and final settlement of E.P.Amount. Full Satisfaction Memo signed by the D.Hr, and Counsel for D.Hr. Full Satisfaction is recorded. Hence, the EP is Terminated.

Pronounced by me in the open Court this the 29 th day of April, 2026.

(Sd/- C.K.V. SATYAKANTH KUMAR)

First Additional Civil Judge,

[ Junior Division ], Tirupati.

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

Nil. //Attested//(Sd/- C.K.V. SATYAKANTH KUMAR)

First Additional Civil Judge,

(Sd/- C.K.V. SATYAKANTH KUMAR)

[ Junior Division ], Tirupati.

First Additional Civil Judge, [ Junior Division ], Tirupati.