Sri.c.ramana Reddy

Junior Civil Judge

JCJ Naidupeta · Nellore · Andhra Pradesh

SRI.C.RAMANA REDDY, Junior Civil Judge, is posted at JCJ Naidupeta, Nellore, Andhra Pradesh, India. 21 court orders on record since 2020. 5 judgments with full text available. Primarily handles OS, CC cases.

Total Orders

Judgments

Orders/Month

Posting

Featured Judgments

CC/345/2020 Convicted

SI of Police, Naidupet PS vs Ozili Venkaiah

23 Dec 2020

1 C.C.No.345/2020 dt.23-12-2020

IN THE COURT OF THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF I CLASS,NAIDUPETA

Present: Sri C. Ramana Reddy,

Judicial Magistrate of I class, Naidupeta.

Wednesday, the 23rd day of December, 2020.

C,C. No.345/2020

Between:

State: Sub- Inspector of Police, Naidupet P.S.… Complainant.

A N D:

1. Ozili Venkaiah, S/o Penchalaiah, aged about 23 years, SC-Madiga by caste, Arundatiyawada, Ozili Village and mandal, SPSR Nellore District, Driver of tractor bearing No.AP-03-AJ-4505, Trailor No.Nil.

2. Pandluru Hemanth Kumar, S/o Ramanaiah, aged about 24 years, SC-Madiga by caste, Arundatiyawada, Ozili Village and mandal, SPSR Nellore District, Driver of tractor bearing No.AP-26-TK-1397, Trailor No.AP-26-TK2191.

3. Edupati Venkata Raju, S/o Ramanaiah, aged about 48 years, Kamma by caste, Bharath nagar, naidupet Town. Owner of tractor bearing No.AP-03-AJ-4505, Trailor No.Nil andtractor bearing No.AP-26-TK-1397, Trailor No.AP-26-TK2191. … Accused.

This case is coming before me for final hearing on this day in the presence of Public Prosecutor for prosecution and the accused in person appeared before this court, after having stood over for consideration till this day, this court delivered the following:-

:: JUDGMENT ::

1. The Sub- Inspector of Police, Naidupet P.S, filed charge sheet against accused Nos.1 to 3 in Crime No.205/2020 U/Sec.270, 271 of IPC.

2. The brief averments of the prosecution case are as follows:-

The Government of India implemented lock down and instructed the public to stay in home as covid-19 – Infectious pandemic disease is spreading. There by issued directions to police officials to implement lock down directions, if any one violates register the cases. As per directions of Government of India, the police officials are implementing lock down instructions, when that is the situation the accused on 28.04.2020 at about 6.30 hours at Chandra Babu Nagar Colony in

Naidupet Town and Manda, SPSR Nellore District by breakdown the rules formulated by Government of India and malignantly came into streets I.e. you (A1) by Tractor bearing

No.AP-03-AJ-4505 and Trailor bearing No.Nil and you (A2) by Tractor bearing No.AP-39-TK- 1397 and Trailor bearing No.AP-26-TK-2191 by boarding around 50 of coolies in the above said

2 C.C.No.345/2020 dt.23-12-2020

two tractor-trailors with the instigation of you (A3/Owner of the vehicles) for purchase vegetables in Naidupet Town without proper necessitythough they known that there is likely to spread the infection of covid-19 dangerous disease which endangers thei own life, and also others life. Thereby police detained the accused and registered the case, issued 41-A Cr.P.C. notice and instructed them to come to court when they receives summons from court. After completion of investigation police filed charge sheet against accused Nos.1 to 3 hence charge.

3. Cognizance of offence punishable U/Secs.270, 271 IPC wast taken against

Accused Nos.1 to 3.

4. On appearance of accused Nos.1 to 3, copies of documents were furnished to them and Examined u/s.251 Cr.P.C. for the offence u/s 270, 271 IPC against the accused Nos.1 to 3, readover and explained the contents of the offence in Telugu, for which they pleaded guilty. Hence, the court find the plea of accused Nos.,1 to 3 is voluntary without any force. Hence, accused Nos.1 to 3 are convicted u/s 252

Cr.P.C.

5. When accused Nos.1 to 3 being questioned regarding quantum of sentence they represented that it is their first offence, and they are having aged parents and their entire family members are depending upon their source of income. Hence, pleaded mercy.

6. Considering the representation of accused Nos.1 to 3, as the offence clearly discloses that as if they come out of the home by boarding villagers in tractors-trailors, the disease will spread to them due to which other public also suffers, therefore I feel imposition of fine will only meet the ends of justice.

7. Accordingly, A1 to A3 are convicted u/Sec.252 Cr.P.C. Accordingly, A1 to A3 are sentenced to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/- (Rupees One Thousand only) each for the offence punishable u/s 270 IPC, in default of payment of fine, they shall undergo simple imprisonment for a period of one month and to pay a fine of Rs.500/- (Rupees

Five Hundred Only) each for the offence punishable U/Sec.271 IPC, in default of payment of fine, they shall undergo simple imprisonment for a period of 15 days, totally Rs.4,500/- (Rupees Four Thousand and Five Hundred only).

8. The SHO, Naidupet is directed to return the seized Tractor bearing No.AP-

3 C.C.No.345/2020 dt.23-12-2020

03-AJ-4505 and Trailor No.Nil and another Tractor bearing No.AP-26-TK-1397 and

Trailor bearing No.AP-26-TK-2191 to its registered owner immediately.

Typed to my dictation to Stenographer Grade-III directly on system, corrected it and pronounced by me in open court on this the 23rd day of December- 2020.

Sd/- C. Ramana Reddy,

Judicial Magistrate of First Class,

Naidupet. APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE:- - NIL-

Sd/- C. Ramana Reddy,

J.M.F.C., Naidupet.

//True copy//

Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Naidupet.

CC/266/2020 Convicted

Sub-Inspector of Police, Naidupet Police Station vs Marabathina Krishnaiah

23 Dec 2020

1 C.C.No.266/2020 dt.23-12-2020

IN THE COURT OF THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF I CLASS,NAIDUPETA

Present: Sri C. Ramana Reddy,

Judicial Magistrate of I class, Naidupeta.

Wednesday, the 23rd day of December, 2020.

C,C. No.266/2020

Between:

State: Sub- Inspector of Police, Naidupet P.S.… Complainant.

A N D:

Marabathina Krishnaiah, S/o Venkata Subbaiah, aged about 48 years, Kaikala by caste, resident of Ashok Nagar, Naidupet Town, owner of Tea shop near PVS Hospital, Naidupet Town. … Accused.

:: JUDGMENT ::

1. The Sub- Inspector of Police, Naidupet P.S, filed charge sheet against accused in Crime No.180/2020 U/Sec.270, 271 of IPC.

2. The brief averments of the prosecution case are as follows:-

The Government of India implemented lock down and instructed the public to stay in home as covid-19 – Infectious pandemic disease is spreading. There by issued directions to police officials to implement lock down directions, if any one violates register the cases. As per directions of Government of India, the police officials are implementing lock down instructions, when that is the situation the accused on 17.04.2020at about 8.30 hours at PVS Hospital, Naidupet Town by breakdown the rules formulated by Government of India and malignantly opened his

Tea shop though he known that there is likely to spread the infection of covid-19 dangerous disease which endangers his own life, and also others life. Thereby police detained the accused and registered the case, issued 41-A Cr.P.C. notice and instructed him to come to court when he receives summons from court. After completion of investigation police filed charge sheet against accused hence charge.

2 C.C.No.266/2020 dt.23-12-2020

3. Cognizance of offence punishable U/Secs.270, 271 IPC wast taken against

Accused.

4. On appearance of accused, copies of documents were furnished to him and

Examined u/s.251 Cr.P.C. for the offence u/s 270, 271 IPC against the accused, readover and explained the contents of the offence in Telugu, for which he pleaded guilty. Hence, the court find the plea of accused is voluntary without any force.

Hence, accused is convicted u/s 252 Cr.P.C.

5. When accused being questioned regarding quantum of sentence he represented that it is his first offence, and he is having aged parents and his entire family members are depending upon his source of income. Hence, pleaded mercy.

6. Considering the representation of accused, as the offence clearly discloses that as if he come out of the home and opened his Tea shop, the disease will spread to him due to which other public also suffers, therefore I feel imposition of fine will only meet the ends of justice.

7. Accordingly, Accused is convicted U/Sec.252 Cr.P.C. Therefore, Accused is sentenced to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/- (Rupees One Thousand only) for the offence punishable u/s 270 IPC, in default of payment of fine, he shall undergo simple imprisonment for a period of one month and to pay a fine of Rs.500/- (Rupees Five hundred only) for the offence punishable u/s 271 IPC, In default of payment of fine, he shall undergo simple imprisonment for a period of 15 days, totally Rs.1,500/- (Rupees One Thousand and Five Hundred only).

Typed to my dictation to Stenographer Grade-III directly on system, corrected it and pronounced by me in open court on this the 23rd day of December- 2020.

Sd/- C. Ramana Reddy,

Judicial Magistrate of First Class,

Naidupet. APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE:- - NIL-

Sd/- C. Ramana Reddy,

J.M.F.C., Naidupet.

//True copy//

Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Naidupet.

CC/281/2020 Convicted

SI of Police, Naidupet vs Abdul Rehman Nazar

23 Dec 2020

1 C.C.No.281/2020 dt.23-12-2020

IN THE COURT OF THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF I CLASS,NAIDUPETA

Present: Sri C. Ramana Reddy,

Judicial Magistrate of I class, Naidupeta.

Wednesday, the 23rd day of December, 2020.

C,C. No.281/2020

Between:

State: Sub- Inspector of Police, Naidupet P.S.… Complainant.

A N D:

Abdul Rehman Nazar, S/o Abdul Rehman, aged about 61 years, Muslim, Gandhi Mandhir, Naidupet Town. … Accused.

:: JUDGMENT ::

1. The Sub- Inspector of Police, Naidupet P.S, filed charge sheet against accused in Crime No.202/2020 U/Sec.270, 271 of IPC.

2. The brief averments of the prosecution case are as follows:-

The Government of India implemented lock down and instructed the public to stay in home as covid-19 – Infectious pandemic disease is spreading. There by issued directions to police officials to implement lock down directions, if any one violates register the cases. As per directions of Government of India, the police officials are implementing lock down instructions, when that is the situation the accused on 26.04.2020at about 17.00 hours at Gandhi Mandhir Centre in Naidupet

Town by breakdown the rules formulated by Government of India and malignantly selling Tea and congregated the public in one place though he known that there is likely to spread the infection of covid-19 dangerous disease which endangers his own life, and also others life. Thereby police detained the accused and registered the case, issued 41-A Cr.P.C. notice and instructed him to come to court when he receives summons from court. After completion of investigation police filed charge sheet against accused hence charge.

2 C.C.No.281/2020 dt.23-12-2020

3. Cognizance of offence punishable U/Secs.270, 271 IPC wast taken against

Accused.

4. On appearance of accused, copies of documents were furnished to him and

Hence, accused is convicted u/s 252 Cr.P.C.

6. Considering the representation of accused, as the offence clearly discloses that as if he come out of the home and selling Tea by gathering public, the disease will spread to him due to which other public also suffers, therefore I feel imposition of fine will only meet the ends of justice.

Typed to my dictation to Stenographer Grade-III directly on system, corrected it and pronounced by me in open court on this the 23rd day of December- 2020.

Sd/- C. Ramana Reddy,

Judicial Magistrate of First Class,

Naidupet. APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE:- - NIL-

Sd/- C. Ramana Reddy,

J.M.F.C., Naidupet.

//True copy//

Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Naidupet.

OS/213/2019

Damarapu Vinod vs Aligeshan Naresh Kumar

31 Dec 2020

IN THE COURT OF THE JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE, NAIDUPET.

Present: Sri C. Ramana Reddy,

Junior Civil Judge, Naidupet.

Thursday, the 31st day of December, 2020

O.S. No. 213 of 2019

Damarapu Vinod ...Plaintiff.

Verses.

Aligeshan Naresh Kumar ... Defendant.

This suit coming on 23122020 for hearing before me in the presence of Sri B. Suresh, advocate for the plaintiff, and the defendant is having been called absent and set exparte, this Court delivered the following:

J U D G M E N T

This is suit filed for recovery for a sum of Rs.2,29,700/ being principal and interest due on a promissory note dated 02102017 executed by defendant in favour of the plaintiff for Rs.1,50,000/ with future interest at 24% p.a., and for costs of the suit.

2.The brief averments of the plaint are as follows:

That on 02102017 the defendant borrowed an amount of

Rs.1,50,000/ (Rupees One Lakh and Fifty Thousand only) from the plaintiff and he executed Promissory note dated 02102017 in favour of the plaintiff for the said amount agreeing to repay the same with interest at 24% p.a.

Subsequently the defendant did not make any payment due under suit promissory note, inspite of repeated oral demands and issuance of legal notices dt.22.03.2019 and 24.10.2019 by the plaintiff. Hence, the suit.

3.The defendant failed to file written statement inspite of giving sufficient opportunity. Hence, the defendant was set exparte as per docket order dated 08122020.

4.Now the point for consideration is “Whether the plaintiff is entitled

to recover the suit amount from the defendant with costs and future

interest?

5.On behalf of the plaintiff, Plaintiff himself examined as P.W.1 and marked Exs.A1 to A5.

6.The plaintiff in support of his claim filed Ex.A1 to A.5. Ex.A.1 is the suit promissory note which clearly shows that the defendant borrowed an amount of Rs.1,50,000/ and did not make any payment, subsequently. So the plaintiff got issued Exs.A.2 and A4 legal notices to the defendant under

Ex.A3 postal receipt and Ex.A5 the track consignment of legal notice dt.24.10.2019. Even after issuing legal notices the defendant failed to repay the amount under Ex.A1. Since the defendant did not contest the suit, the pleadings and evidence of P.W.1 remained unchallenged. Hence, the plaintiff/P.W.1 is entitled for a decree. This point is answered accordingly.

7. In the result, the suit is decreed with costs and plaintiff is entitled to recover an amount of Rs.2,29,700/ from the defendant with future interest on the principal amount of Rs.1,50,000/ at 12% P.A. from the date of the suit till the date of decree and at 6% P.A. from the date of decree till the date of realization.

Typed to my dictation by the Stenographer GradeIII, corrected and

pronounced by me in the Open Court, this the 31st day of December, 2020.

Sd/ C. Ramana Reddy,

Junior Civil Judge,

Naidupet 3

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

WITNESSES EXAMINED FOR

Plaintiff: Defendant P.W.1: Damarapu Vinod NIL (Set exparte)

Exhibits marked for plaintiff.

Ex.A1 is the suit promissory note dated 02102017 executed by the defendant in favour of the plaintiff for Rs.1,50,000/.

Ex.A2 is the office copy of legal notice dt.22032019.

Ex.A3 is the postal acknowledgment.

Ex.A4 is the office copy of legal notice dt.24102019.

Ex.A5 is the track consignment of legal notice dt.24102019.

Exhibits marked for defendant

NIL.

Sd/ C.R.R.,

J.C.J.

Naidupet

//True copy//

Junior Civil Judge,

Naidupet

OS/182/2019

Marri Naga Raju vs Kota Ranemma

21 Dec 2020

IN THE COURT OF THE JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE, NAIDUPET.

Present: Sri C. Ramana Reddy,

Junior Civil Judge, Naidupet.

Monday, the 21st day of December, 2020

O.S. No. 182 of 2019

Marri Naga Raju ...Plaintiff.

Verses.

Kota Ranemma ... Defendant.

This suit coming on 21122020 for hearing before me in the presence of Sri K. Dasaiah Modaliar, advocate for the plaintiff, and the defendant is having been called absent and set exparte, this Court delivered the following:

J U D G M E N T

This is suit filed for recovery for a sum of Rs.1,72,000/ being principal and interest due on a promissory note dated 03102016 executed by defendant in favour of the plaintiff for Rs.1,00,000/ with future interest at 24% p.a., and for costs of the suit.

2.The brief averments of the plaint are as follows:

That on 03102016 the defendant borrowed an amount of

Rs.1,00,000/ (Rupees One Lakh only) from the plaintiff and he executed

Promissory note dated 03102016 in favour of the plaintiff for the said amount agreeing to repay the same with interest at 24% p.a. Subsequently the defendant did not make any payment due under suit promissory note, inspite of repeated demands made by the plaintiff. Hence, the suit.

3.Even after service of summons, the defendant was called absent, no representation. Hence the defendant was set exparte as per docket order

dated 06122019.

4.Now the point for consideration is “Whether the plaintiff is entitled 2

to recover the suit amount from the defendant with costs and future

interest?

5.On behalf of the plaintiff, Plaintiff himself examined as P.W.1 and marked Ex.A1.

6.The plaintiff in support of his claim filed Ex.A1. Ex.A1 is the suit promissory note dated 03102016 executed by the defendant in favour of the plaintiff. Ex.A.1 suit promissory note clearly shows that the defendant borrowed an amount of Rs.1,00,000/ and subsequently he did not make any payment. So the plaintiff filed this suit for recovery of the amount under

Ex.A1. Since the defendant did not contest the suit, the pleadings and evidence of P.W.1 remained unchallenged. Hence, the plaintiff/P.W.1 is entitled for a decree. This point is answered accordingly.

7. In the result, the suit is decreed with costs and plaintiff is entitled to recover an amount of Rs.1,72,000/ from the defendant with future interest on the principal amount of Rs.1,00,000/ at 12% P.A. from the date of the suit till the date of decree and thereafter at 6% P.A. from the date of decree till the date of realization.

Typed to my dictation by the Stenographer GradeIII, corrected and

pronounced by me in the Open Court, this the 21st day of December, 2020.

Sd/ C. Ramana Reddy,

Junior Civil Judge,

Naidupet

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

WITNESSES EXAMINED FOR

Plaintiff: Defendant P.W.1: Marri NagarajuNIL (Set exparte)

Exhibits marked for plaintiff.

Ex.A1 is the suit promissory note dated 03102016 executed by the defendant in favour of the plaintiff for Rs.1,00,000/.

Exhibits marked for defendant

NIL.

Sd/ C.R.R.,

J.C.J.

Naidupet

//True copy//

Junior Civil Judge,

Naidupet

Order Record 20 total

Case No.	Parties	Date	Type	Outcome
OS/213/2019	Damarapu Vinod vs Aligeshan Naresh Kumar	31 Dec 2020	Judgement	—
CC/266/2020	Sub-Inspector of Police, Naidupet Police Station vs Marabathina Krishnaiah	23 Dec 2020	Judgement	Convicted
CC/281/2020	SI of Police, Naidupet vs Abdul Rehman Nazar	23 Dec 2020	Judgement	Convicted
CC/345/2020	SI of Police, Naidupet PS vs Ozili Venkaiah	23 Dec 2020	Judgement	Convicted
OS/182/2019	Marri Naga Raju vs Kota Ranemma	21 Dec 2020	Judgement	—
CC/391/2020	SI of Police, Naidupet PS vs Pathralapati Balaji	15 Dec 2020	Judgement	—
OS/163/2019	Peramsetty Dhananjaya vs Yenamala Guravaiah	19 Nov 2020	Judgement	—
OS/184/2019	Nelavalli Muni Naidu vs Vamkela Muni Krishnaiah	19 Nov 2020	Judgement	—
OS/152/2019	Kurukonda Surendra vs Pallipati Srinivasulu	11 Nov 2020	Judgement	—
OS/200/2019	Moduboyina Mallikarjun vs Bodugu Mahadevaiah	09 Nov 2020	Judgement	—
OS/128/2019	Nelavalli Muninaidu vs Vankila Munikrishnaiah	05 Nov 2020	Judgement	—
OS/155/2019	Nelavalli Muni Naidu vs Mummadi Subrahmanyam	03 Nov 2020	Judgement	—
OS/156/2019	Chiguru Vada Ranjith Kumar vs Basavanuru Seshaiah	02 Nov 2020	Judgement	—
OS/179/2019	Nelavalli Muni Naidu vs Vemkela Muni Krishnaiah	22 Oct 2020	Decree	—
OS/179/2019	Nelavalli Muni Naidu vs Vemkela Muni Krishnaiah	22 Oct 2020	Judgement	—
OS/113/2019	Puchalapalli Ramachandra reddy vs Veluru Kodandaiah	15 Oct 2020	Decree	—
OS/113/2019	Puchalapalli Ramachandra reddy vs Veluru Kodandaiah	15 Oct 2020	Judgement	—
CC/114/2017	Sub inspector of police Naidupet vs Gounupalli Subrahmanyam	14 Oct 2020	Judgement	—
CC/719/2015	SHO Naidupeta PS vs Mutthu Raja @ Vaartha Raja	18 Sep 2020	Judgement	—
CC/61/2018	AP State vs Ganta Madhukrishna	08 Sep 2020	Judgement	—

Monthly Orders (Last 12 Months)

Dec 2020		6
Nov 2020		7
Oct 2020		6
Sep 2020		2

Frequently Asked Questions

How many cases has SRI.C.RAMANA REDDY handled?

SRI.C.RAMANA REDDY has handled 21 court orders since 2020 at JCJ Naidupeta. The average disposal rate is 4 orders per month.

What types of cases does SRI.C.RAMANA REDDY hear?

Based on available records, SRI.C.RAMANA REDDY primarily handles Civil matters (Original Suits) and Criminal matters (Criminal Cases) at JCJ Naidupeta.

Where is SRI.C.RAMANA REDDY currently posted?

SRI.C.RAMANA REDDY is posted as Junior Civil Judge at JCJ Naidupeta, Nellore, Andhra Pradesh.

Are judgments by SRI.C.RAMANA REDDY available online?

Yes. 5 judgments by SRI.C.RAMANA REDDY are available on Legistro with full text, outcome, and sections cited.

How fast does SRI.C.RAMANA REDDY dispose cases?

SRI.C.RAMANA REDDY disposes approximately 4 cases per month, based on 21 orders handled over their tenure at JCJ Naidupeta.

Since when is SRI.C.RAMANA REDDY serving?

SRI.C.RAMANA REDDY has been serving at JCJ Naidupeta since 2020.

Case Types

OS 67%

CC 33%

Posting History

Jul 2020 — Jan 2021

Junior Civil Judge · 21 orders

Outcomes on Record

Convicted 3

Other Judges at this Court

Meenakshi Sundari Pidathala

Junior Civil Judge

125 orders

← View all judges at JCJ Naidupeta