Smt.C.M.Rajyalakshmi

AJCJ cum XVIII Metropolitan Magistarte

Malkajgiri, PDJ Court Complex · Medchal Malkajgiri · Telangana

Smt.C.M.Rajyalakshmi, AJCJ cum XVIII Metropolitan Magistarte, is posted at Malkajgiri, PDJ Court Complex, Medchal Malkajgiri, Telangana, India. 103 court orders on record since 2017. 5 judgments with full text available. Primarily handles OS, EP, RC cases.

103

Total Orders

Judgments

Orders/Month

Posting

Featured Judgments

OS/200/2016

Sri Katigar Ramulu vs M. Balalingam

18 Jul 2018

IN THE COURT OF THE ADDITIONAL JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE,

MALKAJGIRI, RANGA REDDY DISTRICT.

Present : SMT. C.M. RAJYA LAKSHMI,

ADDITIONAL JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE,

MALKAJGIRI, R.R.DISTRICT

Dated this the 18 th day of July, 2018

O.S.No. 200 of 2016

Between: Katigar Ramulu S/o Narsing Rao, Aged 62 years, Occ: Business, R/o 13-2-141/5, Dhoolpet, Hyderabad. ...Plai ntiff

AND

1. M.Balalingam S/o Lakshmaiah Secretary/Correspondent

2. Adi Durga High School, Rep. By M.Balalingam, Secretary/Correspondent Both are R/o 27-136/37, Neredmet, R.K.Puram, Hyderabad.

...Defendants

This suit is coming on this day for final hearing before me in the presence of Sri P.Nagabhushanam, Advocate for the Plaintiff and of Sri K.Yadagiri Rao, Advocate for the Defendants; upon perusing the material documents on record, upon hearing the arguments, the matter stood over for consideration till this day, this Court delivered the following:

J U D G M E N T

This is a suit for eviction and recovery of arrears filed by the plaintiff against the defendants in respect of the suit schedule property i.e. premises comprising of Cellar ground floor and first floor covering land area admeasuring 294 sq. yards bearing door No.29-80/2/1 new Vidhya Nagar , Neredmet,

Malkajgiri Municipality and the same is more vividly described in the plaint schedule.

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

The plaintiff submits that he purchased the suit schedule property from T.S.Prem Kumar through a registered sale deed vide document No.2852/1980. It is submitted that the defendant NO.1 is the correspondent of the defendant No.2 and he approached and requested the plaintiff for letting out the first floor admeasuring 1500 sft. to setup an educational institution in the name of defendant No.2. That the plaintiff has agreed to the request of the defendant and entered in to a registered lease deed on 2.12.2009 vide document NO.3405/2008. It is submitted that the lease period is for a period of 10 years commencing from 1.12.2009 for a rent of Rs.7,086/- per month and the same will be enhanced from time to time as per clause 2 of the lease deed. It is submitted that as per clause 3 of the lease deed, the defendants have to pay the rent every month on or before 5th of the succeeding month.

3.It is further submitted that when ever the rents are paid, receipts are issued to the defendants and the present rent as per the lease deed is Rs.12,553/- per month. It is submitted that the defendant has agreed in the lease deed that if he fails to comply the conditions in the lease deed, the plaintiffs are at liberty to vacate the defendants from the suit schedule property without issuing any notice. It is submitted that the defendants became irregular in paying the monthly rents from December, 2014 to till date and that the defendants have also not paid the property tax to the plaintiffs and when the plaintiff demanded the 3 defendants to repay the arrears of rents along with property tax, the defendants postponed the same from time to time. It is submitted that the plaintiffs had requested the defendants to vacate the suit schedule property upon paying rents and property tax and when they failed to do so , he issued a legal notice on 4.10.2015 calling the defendants to vacate the suit schedule property by paying arrears of Rs.1,74,591/-. But the defendants did not issue any reply even after receiving the legal notice. It is submitted that the defendants are continuing in the suit schedule property without paying rents as per clause 16 of the lease deed, the defendants are supposed to pay damages @ Rs.1000/- per day and for continuing in the possession of the suit schedule property. Hence the plaintiffs filed the present suit seeking to direct the defendants to vacate the suit schedule property and handover the same to the plaintiffs upon paying arrears of rent as mentioned above and also to pay arrears of property tax which is

Rs.91,204/- .

4.The defendants filed their written statement denying the allegations made by the plaintiff against them and admitted that they are tenants in the suit schedule property. It is submitted that the suit schedule property consisted of only a slab in the year 2002-03 without walls or any other structure. That after taking the premises for rent, for the purpose of class rooms and office rooms, the defendants have developed the premises for which no money was given by the plaintiff and it costed nearly Rs.3,30,000/- . It is submitted that during the initial tenancy period, the defendants 4 paid a nominal advance of RS.18,000/- which was not disclosed by the plaintiff. It is submitted that there is no municipal drinking water supply to the suit schedule property and the borewell was dried up long ago and this caused severe sanitary conditions for the students and the teachers. It is submitted that though the above situated was informed by the defendants to the plaintiffs, the plaintiff paid deaf ear to the above problems. That the defendants out of their own pocket is providing drinking water to the suit schedule property at a cost of Rs.4,000/-. It is submitted that the condition of the suit schedule property is very bad, the pipes are leaking, there is water seepage in the walls and drainage problems are also frequently arising. It is submitted that due to the above problems, the defendant No.1 has deducted all the charges that he has spent, from the rental amount and paid the balance rent regularly. As the plaintiff was not getting complete rent, he denied to execute future receipts towards the rents received. The defendants denied of having received legal notice from the plaintiff and also denied that they were paying the rental amount irregularly. It is submitted that there is no cause of action to file the present suit and it is prayed that the suit may be dismissed.

5.On the said rival pleadings, the following issues are framed for trial :- 1.Whether the Plaintiff is entitled to seek eviction of the defendants from the suit schedule property? 2.Whether the plaintiff is entitled for recovery of arrears of rent ?

5 3.Whether the plaintiff is entitled for recovery of

property tax from the defendant?

4.Whether the plaintiff is entitled for damages. If so to what relief?

6.The Plaintiff got examined himself as PW-1 and got marked Exs.A-1 to A-3 in support of his claim. The defendant did not choose to adduce either oral or documentary evidence inspite of giving several opportunities.

7.Heard arguments of plaintiff and defendants arguments were treated heard as there is no representation on behalf of the defendants inspite of giving several opportunities. Perused the record.

8.ISSUE NO.1 to 4 :-

It is the case of the plaintiff that the defendants are tenants in the suit schedule property and they have not been paying rents from December, 2014 and inspite of issuing a legal notice to vacate the suit schedule premises, the defendants failed to pay the monthly rents and failed to vacate the suit schedule property. Hence this suit.

9.It is the case of the defendants that they have been paying rents regularly and they have incurred expenditure to develop the suit schedule property for which they have deducted the amount and paid the remaining balance amount as rents.

They prayed to dismiss the suit as there is no cause of action to file the suit.

10.The plaintiff who got himself examined as PW-1 reiterated the same facts as stated in his plaint in his chief affidavit and got marked Ex.A1 to A3. Where Ex.A1 is the original 6 registered lease deed bearing document No.3409/2009 dated 2.12.2009. Ex.A2 is the office copy of the legal notice dated 4.10.2015. Ex.A3 is the postal receipts dated 6.10.2015.

11.From the documents filed by the plaintiffs, that is

Ex.A1, it is seen that the plaintiff is the owner of the suit schedule property and he leased out the premises to the defendants and the said fact is also admitted by the defendants. It is submitted by the plaintiff that the defendants are irregular in paying rents and the defendants on the other hand admitted that they have been deducting the charges incurred for the repair work from the rental amount and paying the remaining balance amount to the plaintiff. But the defendants did not adduce any oral or documentary evidence to support their version. Further, the plaintiff filed Ex.A2 and A3 showing that the defendants have received the legal notice issued to them by the plaintiff wherein the plaintiff has demanded the defendants to vacate the suit schedule property.

12.It is observed that the defendant admitted that the rental amount is not being paid in full but it is paid after deducting the amount spent for repairs and development of the suit schedule property but he did not furnish any oral or documentary evidence to support his version. Further as the rents are not paid property as agreed by the defendant to the plaintiff, the plaintiff is entitled to seek eviction of the defendant from the suit schedule property. Further as the defendant is continuing in the suit schedule property after termination of the tenancy 7 causing wrongful loss to the plaintiff, the plaintiff is entitled for mesne profits. Hence Issue No.1 to 4 are answered in favour of the plaintiff and against the defendants.

13.In the result, the suit is decreed without costs directing the defendants to vacate and handover the vacant possession of the suit schedule property to the plaintiff within a period of 2 months from this date. The plaintiff is at liberty to file a separate application for ascertainment of mesne profits.

Typed to my dictation, corrected and pronounced

by me in the Open Court on this the 18 th day of July, 2018.

ADDITIONAL JUNIOR CIVIL

JUDGE,

MALKAJGIRI.

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

WITNESSES EXAMINED

FOR THE PLAINTIFFS FOR THE

DEFENDANTS

PW-1 : Katigar Ramulu-Nil-

EXHIBITS MARKED

FOR PLAINTIFF :

Ex.A1 : Original registered lease deed bearing document No.3409/2009 dated 2.12.2009.

Ex.A2 : Office copy of the legal notice dated 4.10.2015.

Ex.A3 : Postal receipts dated 6.10.2015.

FOR DEFENDANT : -Nil-

ADDITIONAL JUNIOR CIVIL

JUDGE,

MALKAJGIRI.

OS/439/2018

Tummala Jagan Mohan Rao vs The Tahsildhar, Malkajgiri Mandal, medcha malkajgiri District.

01 Nov 2018

Page 1 of 5 O.S.No.439/2018

IN THE COURT OF THE ADDITIONAL JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE,

AT MALKAJGIRI, RANGA REDDY DISTRICT.

PRESENT: SMT.C.M.RAJYALAKSHMI,

ADDITIONAL JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE,

AT MALKAJGIRI, R.R.DISTRICT.

Dated this the 1 st day of November, 2018

O.S.No.439 of 2018

Between:

1. Tummala Jagan Mohan Rao S/o Late Venkataramaiah Aged about 78 years, Occ: Retd. Emp.

2. V.Rama Devi W/o Ramesh Velagapudi Aged about 52 years, Occ: Housewife.

3. Tummala Srinivas Rao S/o Jagan Mohan Rao Aged about 49 years, Occ: Business.

All are R/o H.No.30-266/14/502, Venkateshwara Nagar Colony, Near Water Tank, Officers Colony, Sainathpuram, under GHMC Malkajgiri Circle and Mandal

ECIL Post, Hyderabad – 500 062...Plaintiffs

AND

1.The Thasildar, Malkajgiri Mandal, Medchal Malkajgiri District.

2. All Concerned. ...Defendants

This Suit is coming for final hearing and disposal before me in the presence of Sri.P.Venkat Reddy, Learned counsel for the Plaintiffs and the Defendant No.1 having remained exparte and having stood over for consideration the Court delivers the following:-

:: JUDGMENT ::

This suit is filed seeking a declaration that the plaintiffs are the legal heirs of Late Smt.T.Lakshmi Narasamma.

2.Brief averments of the plaint are as follows:

The Plaintiffs submit that they are the permanent residents of H.NO.30-266/14/502, Venkateshwara Nagar Colony,

Page 2 of 5 O.S.No.439/2018

Near Water Tank, Officers Colony, Sainathpuram, under GHMC

Malkajgiri Circle and Mandal, ECIL Post, Hyderabad. It is submitted that the plaintiff No.1 is the husband and the plaintiff NO.2 and 3 are the children of Late Smt.T.Lakshmi Narasamma who died on 2.1.2018 leaving behind the plaintiffs as her surviving legal heirs.

3.It is further submitted that Late Smt.T.Lakshmi

Narasamma during her life time purchased the following properties on her name :

1)Plot bearing No.01, adm. 302 sq yards in Sy.No.568 situated at Dammaiguda Village and GP, Keesara Mandal, Medchal Malkajgiri District through sale deed bearing document No.1748/2004 dated 13.10.2004 2)Plot bearing No.110, adm. 300 sq yards in Sy.No.16 and 17 situated at Toopranpet Village, Choutuppal Mandal, Nalgonda District through sale deed bearing document No.200/1987 dated 24.1.1987.

3)Plot bearing No.605, adm. 392 sq. yards in Sy.No.52 part, Pasammamula Village, Hayathnagar Mandal, Ranga Reddy District through sale deed bearing document No.6864/1985

dated 1.10.1985.

4.It is further submitted that after the death of Late

Smt.T.Lakshmi Narasamma, plaintiffs being the legal heirs approached the defendant No.1 on 4.6.2018 and made representation seeking issuance of family member certificate, but they refused to issue the same stating that they are not competent authority to issue a family members/Legal heir certificate to the private persons and advised the plaintiffs to approach the competent court for the relief. Hence the plaintiffs having left with no other alternative, approached this Hon’ble Court seeking

Page 3 of 5 O.S.No.439/2018 declaration to declare the plaintiffs as legal heirs of Late

Smt.T.Lakshmi Narasamma.

5.After numbering the suit, summons were ordered to the defendants. Inspite of service of summons, the defendants failed to appear before the Court and hence they are set exparte.

Accordingly the suit was posted for the evidence of plaintiffs.

6.In support of their claim the plaintiffs got examined plaintiff No.3 as Pw-1 and got marked Ex.A1 to A12.

7.Heard the learned counsel for the plaintiffs and perused the record.

8.Now the point for determination is: Whether the plaintiffs are entitled to be declared as the legal heirs of Late

Smt.T.Lakshmi Narasamma. If so to what relief?

9.POINT:- The contention of the plaintiffs is that plaintiff

No.1 is the husband and the plaintiff No.2 and 3 are the children of

Late Smt.T.Lakshmi Narasamma who died on 2.1.2018 leaving behind the plaintiffs as her legal heir and thereafter plaintiffs approached the defendant No.1 seeking issuance of family members/ legal heir certificate, but they refused to issue the same and advised the plaintiffs to get the legal heir certificate from the court of law.

10.In support of their claim the plaintiffs relied upon Ex.A1 to A12. Ex.A1 is the Death certificate of Late Smt.T.Lakshmi

Narasamma dated 31.1.2018 issued by the Registrar of Births and

Page 4 of 5 O.S.No.439/2018

Deaths, circle No.12, GHMC. Ex.A2 to A5 are the xerox copies of

Aadhar cards of deceased and plaintiffs No.1 to 3. Ex.A6 is the certified copy of the registered sale deed bearing document

NO.1748/2004 dated 13.2.2004. Ex.A7 is the certified copy of the registered sale deed bearing document No.6864/1985 dated 1.10.1985. Ex.A8 to A12 are the statement of encumbrance on property dated 22.9.2018, 17.9.2018 and 15.9.2018 respectively.

11.The contention of the plaintiffs and the evidence of PW- 1 supported by Ex.A1 which is the original death certificate of Late

Smt.T.Lakshmi Narasamma shows that she died on 2.1.2018. Ex.A2 to A5 are Aadhar cards of deceased Late Smt.T.Lakshmi

Narasamma and plaintiffs No.1 to 3 in which it is clearly shown that Plaintiff No.1 is the husband and plaintiff No.2 and 3 are the children of Late Smt.T.Lakshmi Narasamma. It is seen from Ex.A6 and A7 that the properties sought for mutation was purchased by the Late Smt.T.Lakshmi Narasamma and from Ex.A8 to A12 it is seen that the said property is still existing in her name, who is the wife of plaintiff No.1 and mother of plaintiff No.2 and 3. Through the evidence of Pw.1 supported by Ex.A1 to A12 the plaintiffs succeeded in proving that they are the legal heirs of Late

Smt.T.Lakshmi Narasamma. Hence in view of the above discussion they are entitled to seek a legal heir certificate in respect of the above property i.e. Plot bearing No.01, adm. 302 sq yards in

Sy.No.568 situated at Dammaiguda Village and GP, Keesara

Mandal, Medchal Malkajgiri District through sale deed bearing document No.1748/2004 dated 13.10.2004. No relief can be

Page 5 of 5 O.S.No.439/2018 passed with regard to the properties No.2 and 3 as this courts lacks territorial jurisdiction to pass orders in respect of them.

12.In the result, the suit is decreed partially without costs declaring the plaintiffs as the legal heirs of Late Smt.T.Lakshmi

Narasamma.

Typed to my dictation, corrected and pronounced

by me in the open court on this the 1 st day of November,

2018.

SD/-

ADDITIONAL JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE,

MALKAJGIRI.

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

WITNESSES EXAMINED

On behalf of the Plaintiffs: On behalf of the

Defendants:

PW1: Tummala Srinivas rao-Nil-

EXHIBITS MARKED

On behalf of the Plaintiffs:

Ex.A1 : Death certificate of Late Smt.T.Lakshmi Narasamma dated 31.1.2018 issued by the Registrar of Births and Deaths, circle No.12, GHMC. Ex.A2 to A5 : Xerox copies of Aadhar cards of deceased and plaintiffs No.1 to 3. Ex.A6 : Certified copy of the registered sale deed bearing document NO.1748/2004 dated 13.2.2004. Ex.A7 : Certified copy of the registered sale deed bearing document No.6864/1985 dated 1.10.1985. Ex.A8 : Statement of encumbrance on property dated 22.9.2018, Ex.A9 : Statement of encumbrance on property dated 17.9.2018, Ex.A10 : Statement of encumbrance on property dated15.9.2018, Ex.A11 : Statement of encumbrance on property dated 15.9.2018, Ex.A12 : Statement of encumbrance on property dated 17.9.2018.

On behalf of the Defendants: -Nil-

SD/-

ADDITIONAL JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE,

MALKAJGIRI.

OS/370/2018

E.V.S. Subrahmanyam vs P.Vijay Shanker

02 Jan 2019

IN THE COURT OF THE I ADDITIONAL JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE,

AT MALKAJGIRI, RANGA REDDY DISTRICT.

PRESENT : SMT.B.SOUJANYA,

II AJCJ-CUM-ADDITIONAL XIX

METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE,

MALKAJGIRI, R.R.DISTRICT.

(FAC) I ADDITIONAL JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE,

AT MALKAJGIRI, R.R.DISTRICT.

Dated this the 2 nd day of January, 2019

O.S No.370 of 2018

Between: E.V.S.Subrahmanyam S/o E.Seshagiri Rao Occ: Pvt. Employee, R/o H.No.1-5-408/1/2,

Suryanagar,Old Alwal, Secunderabad. ...Plaintiff

AND

P.Vijay Shanker S/o Babu Perumal, R/o H.No.1-30-517/1, Gayathri nagar,

Subashnagar, Alwal, Secunderabad. ...Defendant

This Suit is coming for final disposal before me in the presence of Sri.S.Ravinder Reddy, Advocate for the Plaintiff and the Defendant having remained exparte and having stood over for consideration the Court delivers the following:-

:JUDGMENT:

This suit is filed by the plaintiff against the defendant seeking eviction of the defendant from the suit schedule property and arrears of rent.

02.The pleadings of the plant in brief is that :

The plaintiff is the absolute owner of the house bearing

No.1-30-517/1, Gayathrinagar, Subashnagar, Alwal, Medchal

District. The defendant approached the plaintiff and requested to let out the said property to him and the plaintiff agreed the same and entered into a Rental agreement dated 26.10.2016 and let out the property to the defendant on monthly rent of Rs.10,000/- 2

Per month.

03.The plaintiff further averred that the said agreement was expired on 26.9.2017 and as per the clause No.9 of the rental agreement, if the tenant agrees to continue the agreement, the tenant should pay 10% extra and make a new rental agreement.

But, the defendant expressed his inability to continue and requested two months time to vacate the suit schedule property.

Thereafter, defendant failed to vacate the premises, damaging the house property intentionally to cause wrongful loss to the plaintiff and deliberately causing nuisance to the locality people by way of blocking the drainage etc,. The plaintiff informed the same to the colony President, considering the same colony president also advised the defendant to vacate the premises, as agreed and not to cause nuisance in the locality.

04.The plaintiff further averred that after expiry of the rental agreement the defendant is continuing in the said premises the plaintiff got issued a legal notice demanding him to pay the arrears of rent and handover the possession of the property within 15 days from the date of receipt of the legal notice and damages from March, 2018 @ Rs.30,000/- per moth, but the defendant got issued a reply to the said legal notice with false allegations. The plaintiff further averred that the defendant has not vacated the property and is not paying the monthly rents from March, 2018. It is averred that the continuation of the defendant in the suit schedule property after termination of the tenancy is causing wrongful loss to the plaintiff. Hence the plaintiff filed the suit seeking eviction and arrears of rents.

05. The summons were served upon the defendant but he was called absent as such the defendant was set exparte.

06.In support of his case the plaintiff got examined himself as PW1 and got marked Ex.A1 and A5.

07. Heard the learned counsel for the plaintiff and perused the record and the evidence of Pw-1 along with documents.

08.Now the points for determination are:

01.Whether the plaintiff is entitled for the eviction of the defendant from the suit schedule property?

02.Whether the plaintiff is entitled for arrears of rent.

If so to what relief?

09.POINT Nos.1 and 2:-

The contention and the evidence of the plaintiff is that he is the land lord of the suit schedule property and the defendant is the tenant having being inducted as a tenant in the suit schedule property as per the rental agreement dated 26.10.2016 and the said agreement expired on 26.9.2017 but the defendant is neither paying the monthly rents nor vacating the premises and inspite of issuance of the legal notice terminating the tenancy the defendant is continuing in the suit schedule property and causing wrongful loss to the plaintiff.

10.The relationship of landlord and tenant between the plaintiff and the defendant, the quantum of rent and the period of tenancy are not in dispute. Ex.A1 and A3 prove that the plaintiff is the owner of the suit schedule property and as per Ex.A2 rental agreement defendant inducted as a tenant and it expired on 26.9.2017. Further the contention of the plaintiff that the after expiry of tenancy period defendant failed to vacate the premises 4 and defaulted in payment of monthly rents from March 2018. As the plaintiff has terminated the tenancy by issuing a notice U/sec 106 of the Transfer of Property Act the defendant is liable to vacate the suit schedule property. Though the plaintiff has claimed an amount of Rs.30,000/- per month towards damages from March, 2018 at this stage there is no evidence to prove that his property was damaged as entitled by the plaintiff. Moreover the plaintiff has not pleaded the said relied in his prayer. Further though as per Ex.A5 reply notice the defendant stated that he requested the plaintiff many time to renew the tenancy by executing a fresh rental agreement, but plaintiff failed to execute the same. There is no evidence to prove the said contention. In view of the above discussion point No.1 and 2 are answered in favour of the plaintiff and against the defendant.

11.In the result, the suit is decreed without costs directing the defendant to vacate and handover the vacant possession of the suit schedule property to the plaintiff within a period of 2 months from this date. Further the defendant is directed to pay the arrears of rent of Rs.1,00,000/- ( March to December @

Rs.10,000/- per month ) to the plaintiff within a period of two months from this date.

Typed to my dictation, corrected and pronounced

by me in the Open Court on this the 2 nd day of January,

2019.

SD/-

(FAC) I ADDITIONAL JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE,

MALKAJGIRI, RANGA REDDY DISTRICT

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

WITNESSES EXAMINED

On behalf of the Plaintiff:

PW1 E.V.S.Subrahmanyam

On behalf of the Defendant:

Nil

EXHIBITS

On behalf of the Plaintiff:

Ex.A1 :Certified copy of sale deed dated 26.5.2016 with document NO.2376/2016

Ex.A2 :Original rental agreement

Ex.A3 :Loan statement given by HDFCL

Ex.A4 :Legal notice dated 4.5.2018

Ex.A5 :reply notice.

On behalf of the Defendant:

-Nil-

SD/-

(FAC) I ADDITIONAL JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE,

MALKAJGIRI, RANGA REDDY DISTRICT

OS/12/2017

Daka Sailoo vs Gaddam Rajitha

28 Sep 2018

-1-

IN THE COURT OF THE ADDITIONAL JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE,

MALKAJGIRI, RANGA REDDY DISTRICT.

Present : SMT. C.M. RAJYA LAKSHMI,

ADDITIONAL JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE,

MALKAJGIRI, R.R.DISTRICT

Dated this the 28 th day of September, 2018

O.S.NO. 12 of 2017

Between: Daka Sailoo S/o D.Bhoodhaiah Aged 50 years, Occ: Retired Employee, R/o H.NO.17-73, New Venkateshwara Colony, Malkajgiri, Hyderabad.

....Plaintiffs

AND

Gaddam Rajitha W/o G.Balraj Aged 23 years, Occ: Housewife R/o H.NO.12-1-1491/1, Ambedkar Nagar, Lalaguda Secunderabad.

....Defendants

This suit is coming up before me for final hearing and disposal in the presence of Sri R.Rama Krishna, Advocate for the Plaintiffs and the defendants remained exparte; upon perusing the material on record, upon hearing the arguments and having stood over till this day for consideration, this Court delivered the following :

J U D G M E N T

This suit is filed by the plaintiff against the defendants for grant of perpetual injunction restraining the defendants, their family members and others from entering into or interfering in any manner or otherwise causing any hindrance to the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the plaintiff over the suit schedule land ie., residential house bearing no.17-73/1(Old No.17-73) on -2- part of plot No.36/B admeasuring 50 sq.yards situated at New

Venkateshwara Nagar, Malkajgiri, Ranga Reddy District.

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

The plaintiff submits that the he is the owner of the suit schedule property vide registered sale deed bearing document no.1356/2016 dated 12-04-2016 having purchased the same from G.Lakshminarsamma. It is submitted that the plaintiff wanted to do some interior work and so locked the suit schedule property but later after one week, he was surprised to see that the defendant has broke the lock and kept her utensils inside and put her lock to the suit property and when the act of the defendant was questioned by the plaintiff, she warned him with dire consequences. It is submitted that upon due enquiry, he came to know that the defendant is the daughter in law of the vendor of the plaintiff who got divorced from her son and while the dispute was pending, the vendor of the plaintiff sold the suit property to the plaintiff and vacated the premises. It is submitted that the defendant has no right over the suit property as it is the self acquired property of his vendor and that even his son has no right over the said property. The plaintiff submits that he is physically and mentally suffering by the acts of the defendant and hence he filed the present suit seeking relief of perpetual injunction against the defendant in respect of the suit schedule property.

3.The defendants remained exparte.

-3-

4.To substantiate his case, the plaintiff no. 1 got examined herself as PW-1 and marked Exs.A-1 to A-3.

5.Heard the learned counsel for the plaintiff. Perused the record.

6.The point for consideration is:

Whether the plaintiffs is entitled to the relief of

perpetual injunction against the defendant in

respect of the suit schedule property as prayed for?

7.POINT :- This suit is filed by the Plaintiffs seeking relief of perpetual injunction against the defendant in respect of the suit schedule property.

8.It is the case of the plaintiff that he is the owner of the suit schedule property vide registered sale deed bearing document no.1356/2016 dated 12-04-2016 having purchased the same from G.Lakshminarsamma. That the defendant who is the daughter in law of the plaintiff’s vendor is interfering in the said property without any manner of right over the property as it is the self acquired property of the vendor of the plaintiff.

9.In support of his case, the Plaintiff No.1 got examined as PW-1 and reiterated the same facts as stated in the plaint even in his chief affidavit and got marked Ex.A1 to A-3 where

Ex.A-1 is registered sale deed bearing document no.1356/2016

dated 12-04-2016 through which the plaintiff purchased his

property from his vendor, Ex.A-2 is the market value certificate

dated 27-12-16, Ex.A-3 is the certificate of encumbrance on

property dated 27-12-2016 for the period 24-03-1994 to 26-12- -4- 2016 in respect of the suit schedule property showing that the plaintiff is the owner of the suit schedule property as on the date of filing of the suit having purchased the same from his vendor vide Ex.A-1 and it also shows that the vendor of the plaintiff has purchased the suit property from one A.Veeraiah through a registered sale deed bearing document no.224/2006 dated 12- 06-2006. The above transaction also proves that the suit property is the self acquired property of the plaintiff’s vendor.

10.Hence in view of the above discussion and from the documents marked, it is seen that the plaintiff is the owner of the suit schedule property as on the date of filing of the suit and therefore he is entitled to the relief of perpetual injunction against the defendant in respect of the suit schedule property.

The point is accordingly answered.

11.In the result, the suit of the plaintiff is decreed without costs restraining the defendant and their family members from interfering with the peaceful possession of the plaintiff over the suit schedule property.

(Typed by me, corrected and pronounced by me

in open Court, on this the 28 th day of September, 2018.)

ADDITIONAL JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE,

MALKAJGIRI

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

WITNESSES EXAMINED

FOR PLAINTIFF: FOR

DEFENDANT:

-5- PW.1: D.Sailoo -None-

EXHIBITS MARKED

FOR PLAINTIFF: Ex.A-1 : Registered sale deed bearing document no.1356/2016

dt. 12.04.2016,

Ex.A-2 : Market value certificate dated 27-12-16, Ex.A-3 : Certificate of encumbrance on property dated 27-12- 2016 FOR THE DEFENDANT: NIL

ADDITIONAL JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE,

MALKAJGIRI.

OS/182/2017

Canara Bank, Dammaigauda Branch, Rep. by its GPA holder, Smt. Deepa Parick, vs Ganji Murali

19 Jun 2018

Order Record 103 total

Case No.	Parties	Date	Type	Outcome
OS/624/2018	R.ravinde Reddy vs Smt.Laxminavasamma	03 Jan 2019	Order	—
OS/370/2018	E.V.S. Subrahmanyam vs P.Vijay Shanker	02 Jan 2019	Judgment-1	—
OS/53/2015	R. Koteswari vs Hari Singh	08 Nov 2018	Order	—
OS/57/2017	Shaik Javeed vs V.V. Chalapathi	08 Nov 2018	Order	—
OS/152/2017	N.Venkat Ram Reddy vs The Tahsildhar cum Mandal Revenue Office	08 Nov 2018	Order	—
OS/439/2018	Tummala Jagan Mohan Rao vs The Tahsildhar, Malkajgiri Mandal, medcha malkajgiri District.	01 Nov 2018	Judgment-1	—
OS/335/2015	State Bank of India, rep. by its Branch Manager P. Murali Mohan Rao vs Attanti Yeshaya Kumar	08 Oct 2018	Order	—
OS/394/2017	SYNDICATE BANK, Sainikpuri Branch vs Smt. L. Manga	05 Oct 2018	Order	—
OS/408/2018	Chunchu Narsaiah @ Narsimha vs Bandari Venkat Reddy	05 Oct 2018	Order	—
OS/445/2017	SYNDICATE BANK, Sainikpuri Branch vs Smt. S. Saritha	05 Oct 2018	Order	—
OS/474/2017	SYNDICATE BANK, Sainikpuri Branch vs Smt. K. Prameela	05 Oct 2018	Order	—
OS/483/2017	M/s. Bethany Corporate vs Gaddam Thirupathi Reddy	01 Oct 2018	Order	—
OS/488/2017	Nayakapu Rama Swamy vs Ragula Ramesh	01 Oct 2018	Order	—
OS/12/2017	Daka Sailoo vs Gaddam Rajitha	28 Sep 2018	Judgment-1	—
EP/39/2016	Margadarsi chit fund Pvt. Ltd. by Genl. Mgr. A. Suryanarayana Raju vs R. Bhanu Prasad	08 Sep 2018	Order	—
EP/41/2016	Margadarsi chit fund Pvt. Ltd. by Genl. Mgr. A. Suryanarayana Raju vs D. Venkat Ram Reddy	08 Sep 2018	Order	—
EP/82/2016	MARGADARSI CHIT FUND PVT.LTD. vs J. Nalini Sree	08 Sep 2018	Order	—
EP/143/2010	M/S. MARGADARSI CHIT FUND PVT.LTD. vs Vsk. Aparna	08 Sep 2018	Order	—
OS/423/2018	Smt. Meenakshi Jain vs Bhoopal Reddy	08 Sep 2018	Order	—
OS/295/2018	P.Tulasiram vs M.Thirumal Rao	04 Sep 2018	Order	—
OS/517/2017	Neerudi Madhu vs B. Ramulu	04 Sep 2018	Order	—
OS/73/2017	D. Madhusudhan vs J. Venugopal	03 Aug 2018	Order	—
OS/342/2016	Thudum Agamaiah vs Thudum Yadagiri	02 Aug 2018	Order	—
OS/379/2017	SYNDICATE BANK, Sainikpuri Branch vs Smt. Anis Bhanu	01 Aug 2018	Order	—
OS/475/2017	SYNDICATE BANK, Sainikpuri Branch vs Smt. D. Laxmi Bai	01 Aug 2018	Order	—
OS/200/2016	Sri Katigar Ramulu vs M. Balalingam	18 Jul 2018	Judgment-1	—
OS/298/2017	Katta Brahmaiah vs Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation Rep. by Deputy Commissioner,	06 Jul 2018	Order	—
OS/305/2017	Basha Goud vs Srinivas	06 Jul 2018	Order	—
OS/514/2017	Batchu Anil Kumar vs N. Ram Reddy	03 Jul 2018	Order	—
EAS/17/2018	MARGADARSI CHIT FUND PVT.LTD vs M. Appala Konda	03 Jul 2018	Order	—
OS/158/2010	D. Satyanarayana vs A. Ashok	02 Jul 2018	Order	—
OS/245/2018	N.Nanda Kumar vs Tahsildhar,Alwal Mandal	02 Jul 2018	Order	—
OS/274/2017	Syndicate Bank, Sainikpuri Branch, Rep., by its Senior Branch Manager vs Smt.D.Aruna Devi	02 Jul 2018	Order	—
OS/275/2017	SYNDICATE BANK, Sainikpuri Branch vs Smt. MD. Kaniz Begum	02 Jul 2018	Order	—
OS/276/2017	SYNDICATE BANK, Sainikpuri Branch vs Smt. D. Srujana	02 Jul 2018	Order	—
OS/277/2017	SYNDICATE BANK Sainikpuri Branch vs Smt. B. Mariyamma	02 Jul 2018	Order	—
OS/279/2017	SYNDICATE BANK, Sainikpuri vs Smt. K. Vijaya	02 Jul 2018	Order	—
OS/286/2017	Syndicate Bank, Sainikpuri Branch Rep., by its Senior Branch Manager, R.R.District, Hyderabad. vs Smt.M.Shasikala	02 Jul 2018	Order	—
OS/354/2017	SYNDICATE BANK , Sainikpuri Branch vs Smt. V.Srilatha	02 Jul 2018	Order	—
OS/182/2017	Canara Bank, Dammaigauda Branch, Rep. by its GPA holder, Smt. Deepa Parick, vs Ganji Murali	19 Jun 2018	Judgment-1	—
OS/104/2017	Vakiti Akkanna Raju vs G. Sathish @ Sathish Kumar	09 May 2018	Order	—
OS/472/2017	P. Ramulu vs Ramchandra Murthy	09 May 2018	Order	—
OS/125/2018	M. Manamma vs The Tahsildhar Alwal Mandal.	08 May 2018	Judgment-1	—
OS/184/2018	Smt. D. Sarala vs All Concerned	08 May 2018	Order	—
OS/230/2017	Syed Baqer Imdad vs Qamar Jehan Begum Taleyawar	08 May 2018	Judgment-1	—
OS/259/2017	State Bank Of India, RACPC-I vs Yapachettu Durga prasad	08 May 2018	Order	—
OS/333/2017	V. Krishna Mohan Rao vs Sanghi Kodanda Ramaiah @ Dhanraj	08 May 2018	Order	—
OS/376/2016	K. Anji Reddy vs I. Ravi Kiran	08 May 2018	Judgment-1	—
EP/32/2017	Chinthakindi Anil Kumar vs Sirish @ Sirish Kumar	03 May 2018	Order	—
OS/30/2016	D.Ashok Gupta vs D.Venkatesham	21 Mar 2018	Judgment-1	—
OS/41/2018	K. Chandra Shekhar vs S. Lokesh	09 Mar 2018	Order	—
OS/94/2017	Patapati Govardhan vs Mr. Chennaiah	09 Mar 2018	Judgment-1	—
OS/118/2017	Seepathi Uma vs D. Mallesham	09 Mar 2018	Judgment-1	—
OS/523/2017	Smt. Palle Padma Latha vs The Tahsildar, Mandal Reveunue Officer, Alwal.	09 Mar 2018	Order	—
OS/58/2017	S. Ram Mohan Reddy vs M. Venugopal Reddy	08 Mar 2018	Judgment-1	—
OS/421/2017	Smt. A. Swarajya Lakshmi vs Thota Nageshwara Rao	08 Mar 2018	Order	—
OS/428/2017	Swaroop Ram Choudary vs Vinod Chowdary	08 Mar 2018	Order	—
OS/422/2017	P. Pyarelal vs The Commissioner, GHMC Tank Band Road, Hyderabad.	09 Feb 2018	Order	—
OS/537/2017	Smt Asra Nahid vs The Tahsildhar, Kapra MRO,	09 Feb 2018	Judgment-1	—
OS/249/2015	Sunder Lal Arora vs N.P. Sudhir Kumar	08 Feb 2018	Judgment-1	—
EP/30/2017	Deepak Sharma vs M/s. Reliance Infratel Limited.	02 Feb 2018	Order	—
OS/345/2017	V.C. Jangaiah vs The Deputy Commissioner, Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation Alwal	31 Jan 2018	Judgment-1	—
EP/73/2015	SUMAN CHIT FUND PVT.LTD. vs VenkataRajesh N.	30 Jan 2018	Order	—
OS/177/2017	K. Malakondaiah vs K. Adamma	30 Jan 2018	Order	—
OS/174/2014	Smt. K. Bhavana vs Kankadala Srinu	25 Jan 2018	Order	—
OS/251/2015	Smt Shobitha Lavanya vs G. David Ajay Kumar @ T. David Ajay Kumar	25 Jan 2018	Order	—
OS/308/2015	Smt T.E. Prema Kumari @ G.A. Prema Kumari vs Smt Shobitha Lavanya	25 Jan 2018	Order	—
OS/34/2015	smt.Akunuru srilatha vs Akunuru Yadagiri	23 Jan 2018	Judgment-1	—
OS/76/2015	G. Balachandra Goud vs E. Venkat Reddy	23 Jan 2018	Judgment-1	—
OS/166/2016	M/s. BETHANY CORPORATE Rep. by its Proprietor vs Mohammed Yousuf Janimiya	23 Jan 2018	Order	—
OS/327/2016	Smt. Govula Prema Latha vs Shashidar @ Shashi	23 Jan 2018	Order	—
OS/67/2013	Venkateswara Edusupport Limited At Hyderabad. vs Shanker Naik	19 Jan 2018	Judgment-1	—
OS/21/2016	Pasupulate Thirupathy vs P.T. Ram Mohan Raj	18 Jan 2018	Order	—
OS/103/2016	CORPORATION BANK vs M/s. Shree Bharathi IT Solutions.	18 Jan 2018	Judgment-1	—
OS/157/2017	Gidda Ratna Kumari vs The Tahsildar Officer, Keesara	18 Jan 2018	Judgment-1	—
OS/220/2017	Fatima Begum vs ALL CONCERNED	18 Jan 2018	Judgment-1	—
OS/71/2016	Smt. Somu Jagadamba vs Gogikar Shyam	09 Jan 2018	Judgment-1	—
OS/207/2016	Boyana Rama Koteswara Raju vs Singareddy sunder Reddy	09 Jan 2018	Judgment-1	—
OS/260/2017	Smt. Sirra Nagamani vs The Branch Manager Andhra Bank.	09 Jan 2018	Judgment-1	—
OS/386/2017	Smt Allavarapu Annapurna vs The Mandal Revenue Officer, Malkajgiri Mandal	09 Jan 2018	Order	—
OS/395/2017	SYNDICATE BANK Sainikpuri Branch vs Smt. V. Lavanya	09 Jan 2018	Judgment-1	—
OS/417/2017	Smt. P. Padmavathi vs MANDAL REVENUE OFFICER, Malkajgiri Mandal, Hyderabad District.	09 Jan 2018	Order	—
OS/115/2016	Tekumalla Padma Rao vs Thori Tirumala Rao	03 Jan 2018	Order	—
OS/412/2017	Kodoori Lalitha vs The Tahsildhar, Keesara mandal	03 Jan 2018	Order	—
OS/120/2017	Smt. Nilima Auditto vs Sri Devadas Ramanujulu Anjan Kumar	22 Dec 2017	Judgment-1	—
RC/6/2014	Smt. D. Krishnaveni vs Smt. J.Subba Lakshmi	22 Dec 2017	Judgment-1	—
EP/85/2016	MODEL CHIT CORP. LIMITED. vs K.Muralidhar	08 Dec 2017	Order	—
EP/145/2011	KAPIL CHIT FUNDS PVT.LTD, Kushaiguda Branch vs S. Jairaj	08 Dec 2017	Order	—
OS/339/2017	ANDHRA BANK , Kapra Sainikpuri, Hyderabad. vs Mr. Chinthala Srinivas	08 Dec 2017	Order	—
OS/25/2013	Master M. Rahul vs K.B. Reddy	08 Nov 2017	Order	—
OS/349/2017	Anumula Praveena vs The Tahsildar, Kapra Mandal, Medchal -Malkajgiri District.	08 Nov 2017	Judgment-1	—
OS/334/2017	Smt. G. Gowreshwari vs The Thasildar, Malkajgiri Mandal, Ranga Reddy District.	02 Nov 2017	Order	—
OS/222/2017	Bonepalli Venkata Satya prasuna vs The Tahsildar , Kapra mandal, ranga reddy district.	01 Nov 2017	Judgment-1	—
OS/38/2016	Smt. Tata Savitri vs P.V.R. Murthy	06 Oct 2017	Order	—
OS/258/2016	Smt Chadalawada Srilakshmi vs Smt Ch Satyavathi	06 Oct 2017	Order	—
OS/186/2017	Smt. Pilli Jayalakshmi vs The Mandal Revenue Officer MRO Tahsildhar Malkajgiri Mandal.	04 Oct 2017	Judgment-1	—
OS/180/2017	Smt. R. Padma vs The Tahsildar, Keesara Mandal.	03 Oct 2017	Judgment-1	—
OS/317/2017	C.P.Surender vs A.Saidhiraj	03 Oct 2017	Order	—
OS/138/2013	M/s. Venkateswara Edu. Support Ltd.Formerly known as M/s. Hyderabad Vanaspathi Limited. vs M/s. Nava Bharat Ventures Limited.	22 Sep 2017	Judgment-1	—
OS/226/2011	P.V. Narsing Rao vs B.Laxma Reddy	12 Sep 2017	Judgment-1	—

Showing 100 of 103 orders — Log in to browse all pages.

Monthly Orders (Last 12 Months)

Jan 2019		2
Nov 2018		4
Oct 2018		7
Sep 2018		8
Aug 2018		4
Jul 2018		14
Jun 2018		1
May 2018		9
Mar 2018		8
Feb 2018		4
Jan 2018		23
Dec 2017		5

Frequently Asked Questions

How many cases has Smt.C.M.Rajyalakshmi handled?

Smt.C.M.Rajyalakshmi has handled 103 court orders since 2017 at Malkajgiri, PDJ Court Complex. The average disposal rate is 5 orders per month.

What types of cases does Smt.C.M.Rajyalakshmi hear?

Based on available records, Smt.C.M.Rajyalakshmi primarily handles Civil matters (Original Suits, Execution Petitions) and Criminal matters (RC) at Malkajgiri, PDJ Court Complex.

Where is Smt.C.M.Rajyalakshmi currently posted?

Smt.C.M.Rajyalakshmi is posted as AJCJ cum XVIII Metropolitan Magistarte at Malkajgiri, PDJ Court Complex, Medchal Malkajgiri, Telangana.

Are judgments by Smt.C.M.Rajyalakshmi available online?

Yes. 5 judgments by Smt.C.M.Rajyalakshmi are available on Legistro with full text, outcome, and sections cited.

How fast does Smt.C.M.Rajyalakshmi dispose cases?

Smt.C.M.Rajyalakshmi disposes approximately 5 cases per month, based on 103 orders handled over their tenure at Malkajgiri, PDJ Court Complex.

Since when is Smt.C.M.Rajyalakshmi serving?

Smt.C.M.Rajyalakshmi has been serving at Malkajgiri, PDJ Court Complex since 2017.

Case Types

OS 89%

EP 9%

RC 1%

EAS 1%

Posting History

May 2017 — Jan 2019

AJCJ cum XVIII Metropolitan Magistarte · 103 orders

Other Judges at this Court

Smt. G.harika

Principal Junior Civil Judge-cum-Judicial Magistra...

244 orders

Sri L.Raju

I Addl.Junior Civil Judge-cum-I Addl Judicial Magi...

54 orders

Smt. J.prasanthi

II Addl.Junior Civil Judge-cum-II Addl Judicial Ma...

350 orders

Smt. Potedar Sarala Rekha

III Addl.Junior Civil Judge-cum-III Addl Judicial...

27 orders

Sri. V.Bala Bhaskar Rao

Principal District and Sessions Judge-cum-Family C...

17 orders

Smt. Chittibomma Ashalatha

Fast Track Special Judge for expeditious trial and...

145 orders

Sri. B.Tirupathi

I Addl.District and Sessions Judge-cum-Addl.Family...

853 orders

Sri. D.kiran Kumar

IV Additional District and Sessions Judge

956 orders

Ms. N. Amaravathi

II ADJ-Cum- I Addl MSJ -cum- II Spl Sessions Judge...

140 orders

Smt Rachapudi Sreedevi

Principal Family Court

0 orders

Smt. K. Uma Devi

Additional Family Court

0 orders

Sri. Sattu Ravinder

I Addl.Senior Civil Judge-cum-Addl. Chief Judicial...

43 orders

← View all judges at Malkajgiri, PDJ Court Complex

Smt.C.M.Rajyalakshmi

IN THE COURT OF THE ADDITIONAL JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE,

MALKAJGIRI, RANGA REDDY DISTRICT.

MALKAJGIRI, R.R.DISTRICT

Dated this the 18 th day of July, 2018

AND

J U D G M E N T

property tax from the defendant?

by me in the Open Court on this the 18 th day of July, 2018.

MALKAJGIRI.

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

WITNESSES EXAMINED

FOR THE PLAINTIFFS FOR THE

DEFENDANTS

EXHIBITS MARKED

MALKAJGIRI.

IN THE COURT OF THE ADDITIONAL JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE,

AT MALKAJGIRI, RANGA REDDY DISTRICT.

AT MALKAJGIRI, R.R.DISTRICT.

Dated this the 1 st day of November, 2018

AND

:: JUDGMENT ::

by me in the open court on this the 1 st day of November,

MALKAJGIRI.

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

WITNESSES EXAMINED

On behalf of the Plaintiffs: On behalf of the

EXHIBITS MARKED

MALKAJGIRI.

IN THE COURT OF THE I ADDITIONAL JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE,

AT MALKAJGIRI, RANGA REDDY DISTRICT.

II AJCJ-CUM-ADDITIONAL XIX

METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE,

MALKAJGIRI, R.R.DISTRICT.

(FAC) I ADDITIONAL JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE,

AT MALKAJGIRI, R.R.DISTRICT.

Dated this the 2 nd day of January, 2019

AND

:JUDGMENT:

Typed to my dictation, corrected and pronounced

by me in the Open Court on this the 2 nd day of January,

(FAC) I ADDITIONAL JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE,

MALKAJGIRI, RANGA REDDY DISTRICT

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

WITNESSES EXAMINED

EXHIBITS

(FAC) I ADDITIONAL JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE,

MALKAJGIRI, RANGA REDDY DISTRICT

IN THE COURT OF THE ADDITIONAL JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE,

MALKAJGIRI, RANGA REDDY DISTRICT.

MALKAJGIRI, R.R.DISTRICT

Dated this the 28 th day of September, 2018

J U D G M E N T

perpetual injunction against the defendant in

respect of the suit schedule property as prayed for?

in open Court, on this the 28 th day of September, 2018.)

MALKAJGIRI

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

WITNESSES EXAMINED

EXHIBITS MARKED

MALKAJGIRI.

IN THE COURT OF THE I ADDITIONAL JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE-CUM-

I ADDITIONAL METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE

MEDCHAL-MALKAJGIRI DISTRICT

AT KUSHAIGUDA,

DOCKET ORDER DATED: 19-06-2018

I ADDL.JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE -CUM

I ADDL. JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE,

MEDCHAL- MALKAJGIRI

AT KUSHAIGUDA