Smt. Ch.Ashalatha

1 OF 7O.S.No.831 OF 2013

IN THE COURT OF THE II ADDITIONAL JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE,

WARANGAL.

Thursday, this the 29th of September, 2016.

Present: Smt. Ch.Asha Latha, V-Additional Junior Civil Judge, F.A.C.II-Additional Junior Civil Judge, Warangal.

O.S.No. 831 OF 2013

B E T W E E N:

M/s.Kapil Chit Funds Private Limited, Hanamkonda Branch, represented by its Legal Assistant M.Shiva Prasad, S/o.Shekar, Age: 32 years, R/o. Hanamkonda, Warangal District.

… Plaintiff A N D

1. M.Lakshmi, W/o.Sampath Reddy, Age: 59 years, Occu: Agriculture, R/o.#2-4-173, Ramnagar, Hanamkonda, Warangal.

2. Smt.M.Vijaya Laxmi, S/o.Jayanth Reddy, Age: 33 years, Occu: Business, R/o.# Flat No.107, Swarna Vihar Apartments, Hanamkonda, Warangal.

3. R.Suresh, S/o.Komuraiah, Age: 41 years, Occu: Business, R/o. # 2-6-10491, K.L.N.Reddy Colony, Hanamkonda, Warangal.

4. A.Venkata Malla Reddy, S/o.Rama Chandra Reddy, Age: 40 years, Occu: Business, R/o. # 1-1-25, Chaitanyapuri, Kazipet, Warangal.

5. G.Venkat Reddy, S/o.Thirupathi Reddy, Age: 49 years, Occu: Asst. Exe.Engineer, O/o.Mandala Parishad Development, P&R Dept., Hanamkonda, Warangal, R/o. # 2-7-242, Excise Colony, Subedari, Hanamkonda, Warangal.

6. A.Soujanya, W/o.Venkata Malla Reddy, Age: 36 years, Occu: Business, R/o. # 1-1-25, Chaitanyapuri, Kazipet, Warangal.

7. M.Jayanth Reddy, S/o.Sampath Reddy, Age: 38 years, Occu: Business, R/o. #2-4-173, Ramnagar, Hanamkonda, Warangal.

… Defendants

* * *

This suit is coming up before me on 23-09-2016 for final hearing in the presence of Sri P.Bala Chander Rao, Advocate for the plaintiff; and of Sri T.Ravinder Rao, Advocate for the defendant Nos. 1 to 3 and 7; and the defendant Nos. 4 to 6 are set exparte; and upon hearing and on perusing the material on record, and the matter having stood over for consideration till this day, the Court delivered the following:

2 OF 7O.S.No.831 OF 2013

J U D G M E N T

1.This is a suit for recovery of a sum of Rs.71,927/- against the defendant Nos.1 to 7 basing on a chit transaction and for costs of the suit.

The brief averments of the plaint are being thus,

2.The defendant No.1 joined as a member in the plaintiff Chit fund company in the chit No.05 in series No.WT05N by entering into the Chit

Agreement, dated:09-02-2008. The total value of chit is Rs.15,00,000/- to be subscribed @ Rs.30,000/- per month for 50 months. The plaintiff company conducted auction on 29-06-2009, in which, the defendant

No.1 participated and became successful bidder having agreed to forego Rs.6,00,000/- out of Rs.15,00,000/-. The defendant No.1 paid

Rs.4,20,000/- and his future liability is Rs.10,80,000/-. The defendant

Nos. 2 to 7 stood as guarantors and executed Agreement of

Guarantee, dt: 04-08-2009 and that the defendant Nos. 1 to 7 executed a promissory note on the same day as a collateral security.

Later, the defendant No.1 committed default in payment part of 49 installments i.e., from 10-05-2012. In spite of repeated demands made by the plaintiff, even after, the plaintiff company got issued the Legal

Notice, dated:12-03-2013, the defendants did not choose to repay the amount due to the plaintiff. Hence, this suit.

3.The suit summons served on the defendant Nos.4 to 6, but they did not choose to appear before this Court, hence, they were set exparte. The defendant Nos.1 to 3 and 7 entered appearance. The defendant No.1 filed her written statement and the defendant Nos. 2, 3 and 7 filed adoption memo. It is stated that the defendant No.1 is not aware of the registration of the plaintiff and that the defendant No.1 is 3 OF 7O.S.No.831 OF 2013 not liable to pay the amount to the plaintiff more particularly

Rs.71,927/- and that the calculations made in the plaint are incorrect.

It is stated that the defendant No.1 is to pay only the last installment i.e., Rs.30,000/- to the plaintiff and she demanded the plaintiff to furnish the statement of account, but the plaintiff postponed the same and filed the present suit to squeeze excess amount from the defendants. It is further stated that the defendant No.1 paid 49 installments regularly and never defaulted any amount except the last installment and that the claim of interest is excessive. The plaintiff did not receive the 50th installment even on the representation of defendant No.1 and that no notice is received from the plaintiff. Hence, the defendants prayed to decree the suit for Rs.30,000/- towards 50th installment.

4.Basing on the above pleadings, the following issues are settled for trial :

1. Whether the plaintiff is entitled for recovery of suit amount as prayed for?

2. Whether the defendants have paid the chit installments numbering 49 to the plaintiff company as pleaded?

3. To what relief?

5.During the course of trial, on behalf of the plaintiff, the Collection

Manager of plaintiff company is examined as PW1 and Ex.A1 to

Ex.A16 are marked. On behalf of the defendant Nos.1 to 3 and 7, no oral and documentary evidence is adduced.

6.Heard the learned counsel for the plaintiff and the hearing on behalf of the defendant Nos.1 to 3 and 7 is treated as heard for want of representation.

4 OF 7O.S.No.831 OF 2013

7.Issue Nos.1 and 2: This is a suit filed by the plaintiff against the defendant Nos.1 to 7 for recovery of money basing on a chit transaction. It is the contention of the counsel for the plaintiff, that the plaintiff is able to establish by examining PW1 and by exhibiting

Ex.A1 to Ex.A16, that the defendants are liable to pay the suit amount and sought to decree the suit. On perusal of written statement, there is no dispute with regard to joining of defendant

No.1 in the suit chit, participating in the auction and became successful bidder and receipt of prize amount. It is the main contention of contesting defendants that the defendant No.1 has to pay only the last installment, but the plaintiff filed the present suit by claiming excess amount and sought to decree the suit only for

Rs.30,000/-.

8.To prove its case, the Collection Manager of plaintiff company is examined as PW1. He has reiterated the case of the plaintiff company. He exhibited Ex.A1, Agreement of Chit, dated: 09-02- 2008; Ex.A2, Agreement of Guarantee, dated: 04-08-2009; Ex.A3,

Payment Voucher, dated: 04-08-2009; Ex.A4, Promissory Note,

dated: 04-08-2009 and Ex.A5, Office copy of Legal Notice, dated:

12-03-2013 got issued by the plaintiff company to the defendants.

The Ex.A13, Statement of Account of defendant No.1. Since there is no dispute with regard to joining of defendant No.1 in the suit chit, participating in the auction and became successful bidder and receipt of prize amount, therefore, there is no need to go into the genuineness or otherwise of the documents referred to above.

When the suit is posted for cross examination of PW1 by the counsel for the defendant Nos.1 to 3 and 7. But, neither the contesting 5 OF 7O.S.No.831 OF 2013 defendants nor their counsel choose to appear or represent the suit even several adjournments were granted. At last, the cross examination of PW1 is treated as 'Nil' on 07-09-2016. The defendant

Nos.1 to 3 and 7 have taken the contentions in their written statement that defendant No.1 is to pay only the last installment of

Rs.30,000/- to the plaintiff; but the present suit filed by the plaintiff to squeeze excess amount and that the interest claimed is excessive, but they did not choose to cross examine PW1 and adduce their evidence, to refute the case of the plaintiff. It seems that the defence taken by the defendant Nos.1 to 3 and 7 is for the sake of pleas without there being any truth. The Statement of account under Ex.A13 is clear about the payments made by the defendant No.1. The entries in Ex.A13 clearly establish the case of the plaintiff company that the defendant No.1 has paid only part of 49th installments. The plaintiff in the plaint has given the details of the amount due i.e., Rs.71,927/- from the defendants after excluding the payments made by the defendant No.1. The plaintiff did not claim any excess amount than what it is entitled. In these circumstances, this Court holds that the amount claimed by the plaintiff is true and correct.

9.PW1 stated that in spite of demand, the defendant No.1 did not choose to pay the remaining amount i.e., suit amount and hence, they got issued a Legal Notice on 12-03-2013 demanding the defendants to pay the amount due, but they did not respond to the said notice nor made any payment. Ex.A5, Office copy of Legal

Notice. The Ex.A6 to Ex.A11 are the Postal acknowledgments from defendant Nos.1 to 7 except defendant No.2 whose returned cover is Ex.A12. As already noticed, defendant Nos.4 to 6 are remained 6 OF 7O.S.No.831 OF 2013 exparte. It is not the case of the defendant No.1 who is contesting the suit that she has paid any amount to the plaintiff company after

Ex.A5, Notice or after filing of the suit. Hence, this Court has no hesitation to proceed further.

10.The unchallenged evidence of PW1 and the documents under

Ex.A1 to Ex.A16 is clear that the defendant No.1 has committed default in payment of chit installments and that defendant Nos.2 to 7 stood as guarantors for future liability of defendant No.1 who failed to repay the same. Thus, the defendant Nos.1 to 7 are liable to pay the suit amount to the plaintiff and that the plaintiff is entitled to recover the same. Hence, the Issue Nos.1 and 2 are answered accordingly.

11.Issue No.3: Since the Issue No.1 is answered in favour of the plaintiff and Issue No.2 is answered against the defendants, the suit is to be decreed.

In the result, the suit is decreed with costs directing the defendant Nos.1 to 7 to pay Rs.71,927/- to the plaintiff with interest @ 12% per annum from the date of the suit to till the date of decree and thereafter @ 6% per annum from the date of decree till realization on the principal amount of Rs.59,998/-.

(Typed to my dictation, corrected by me in my computer and pronounced in open court, this the 29th day of September, 2016)

F.A.C.II ADDITIONAL JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE

WARANGAL.

7 OF 7O.S.No.831 OF 2013

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

WITNESSES EXAMINED

FOR PLAINTIFF: FOR DEFENDANTS:

PW1 – M.Manikyam - None-

EXHIBITS MARKED

FOR PLAINTIFF:

Ex.A1: Agreement of Chit, dated: 09-02-2008 Ex.A2: Agreement of Guarantee, dated: 04-08-2009 Ex.A3: Payment Voucher, dated: 04-08-2009 Ex.A4: Demand Promissory Note, dated:04-08-2009 Ex.A5: Office copy of Legal Notice, dated: 12-03-2013 Ex.A6: Postal Acknowledgement Card of defendant No.1 Ex.A7: Postal Acknowledgement Card of defendant No.3 Ex.A8: Postal Acknowledgement Card of defendant No.4 Ex.A9: Postal Acknowledgement Card of defendant No.5 Ex.A10: Postal Acknowledgement Card of defendant No.6 Ex.A11: Postal Acknowledgement Card of defendant No.7 Ex.A12: Returned Postal Cover of defendant No.2 Ex.A13: Statement of Account of defendant No.1 Ex.A14: Authorization Letter, dated: 15-11-2012 Ex.A15: Certified Copy of Firm Registration, dated: 06-05-1998 Ex.A16: Authorization Letter, dated: 16-09-2013

FOR DEFENDANTS: Nil

F.A.C.II ADDITIONAL JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE,

WARANGAL.

1 OF 5O.S.No. 1119 OF 2015

IN THE COURT OF THE VII ADDITIONAL JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE,

WARANGAL.

Friday, this the 9th day of December, 2016.

Present: Smt. Ch.Asha Latha, V-Additional Junior Civil Judge, F.A.C.VII-Additional Junior Civil Judge, Warangal.

O.S.No. 1119 OF 2015

B E T W E E N

1. Mahemudunnisa, W/o.Late Khaja Shabuddin, Age: 39 years, Occu: Household, R/o.H.No.3-1-381/1/A, Kakatiya Colony, Hanamkonda, Warangal city and district.

2. Khaja Sharyaruddin, S/o.Late Khaja Shabuddin, Age: 19 years, Occu: Student, R/o.H.No.3-1-381/1/A, Kakatiya Colony, Hanamkonda, Warangal city and district.

3. Nadira Shahab, D/o.Late Khaja Shabuddin, Age: 16 years, Occu: Student, R/o.H.No.3-1-381/1/A, Kakatiya Colony, Hanamkonda, Warangal city and district.

4. Zeba Shahab, D/o.Late Khaja Shabuddin, Age: 14 years, Occu: Student, R/o.H.No.3-1-381/1/A, Kakatiya Colony, Hanamkonda, Warangal city and district.

(The Plaintiff Nos.3 and 4 being minors represented by their next friend and natural mother i.e., plaintiff No.1 Smt.Mahemudunnisa)

....Plaintiffs

A N D

1. To whomsoever it may concern

2. The District Collector, Warangal.

…. Defendants * * *

This suit is coming up before me on 07-12-2016 for final hearing in the presence of Sri K.Narsimha Rao, Advocate for plaintiffs; and

Sri G.Srinivas Goud, Asst. Government Pleader for defendant No.2;

No objections received on behalf of defendant No.1; and after hearing and on perusal the material on record and having stood over for consideration till this day, this court delivered the following:

2 OF 5O.S.No. 1119 OF 2015

J U D G M E N T

1. This is a suit filed by the plaintiffs to declare them as legal heirs of late Khaja Shahabuddin who died on 15-08-2015 while in service; and for costs of the suit.

The brief averments of the plaint are that:

2. The plaintiff No.1 is wife of deceased Khaja Shahabuddin. The plaintiff Nos.2 to 4 are children of the plaintiff No.1 and deceased

Khaja Shahabuddin who died due to ill health on 15-08-2015 leaving behind the plaintiffs as his legal heirs and successors. During the life time, the deceased Khaja Shahabuddin worked as Senior Inspector in Co-operative Department under the control of Divisional

Co-operative Officer, Mahabubabad. After the death of Khaja

Shahabuddin, the plaintiffs made a requisition to the concerned to provide the death benefits and job on compassionate grounds, on which, the Authorities are directed to produce legal heir certificate.

Then, the plaintiffs have approached the Tahsildar, Hanamkonda for

Legal Heir Certificate who advised to approach the Court of Law.

Hence, this suit.

3. The defendant No.2 entered appearance, but failed to file its written statement within 90 days, hence, the right to filing of written statement by the defendant No.2 is forfeited. On behalf of the defendant No.1, there are no objections received from anybody.

4. Now the point for consideration is:

“Whether the plaintiffs are entitled for the relief of

declaration as prayed for”?

3 OF 5O.S.No. 1119 OF 2015

5.During the course of Trial, on behalf of the plaintiffs, PW1 is examined and Ex.A1 to Ex.A13 are marked.

6.Heard the learned counsel for the plaintiffs.

7.POINT: This is a suit filed by the plaintiffs to declare them as legal heirs of late Khaja Shahabuddin. It is the case of the plaintiffs that the plaintiff No.1 is wife and plaintiff Nos.2 to 4 are children of late Khaja Shahabuddin who died on 15-08-2015 while in service leaving behind the plaintiffs as his legal heirs and that during the life time of Khaja Shahabuddin worked as Senior Inspector in Co- operative Department under the control of Divisional Co-operative

Officer, Mahabubabad and that after the death of Khaja

Shahabuddin, the plaintiffs approached the concerned for employment on compassionate grounds and for benefits, but the authorities directed them to produce the legal heir certificate.

Hence, this suit.

8. To prove their case, the plaintiff No.1 is examined as PW1 by filing her chief affidavit by reiterating the contents of plaint and she exhibited Ex.A1, Death Certificate of Khaja Shahabuddin obtained from Meeseva; Ex.A2, Family Member Certificate obtained from

Meeseva; Ex.A3, Bonafide Certificate of plaintiff No.3; Ex.A4,

Conduct Certificate of plaintiff No.3; Ex.A5, Original Aadhar Card of late Khaja Shahabuddin; Ex.A6 to Ex.A9, Original Aadhar Cards of plaintiff Nos.1 to 4; Ex.A10, Original Household Card; Ex.A11,

Conduct Certificate of plaintiff No.2; Ex.A12, Bonafide Certificate of plaintiff No.2 and Ex.A13, Letter, dated: 17-10-2015 given by the employer of Khaja Shahabuddin. The oral evidence of PW1 and

Ex.A1 to Ex.A13 are remained unrebutted.

4 OF 5O.S.No. 1119 OF 2015

9.From a perusal of the unchallenged evidence of PW1, Ex.A1 to

Ex.A13, it is clear that the plaintiff No.1 is wife of Khaja Shahabuddin and that the plaintiff Nos. 2 to 4 are their children. The relief claimed by the plaintiffs is that to declare them as legal heirs of deceased Khaja Shahabuddin. The purpose stated by the plaintiffs to file the present suit for declaration is that, for employment on compassionate grounds, since the the employer of the deceased directed them to furnish legal heirs certificate stating that they are the legal heirs of deceased Khaja Shahabuddin by issuing Ex.A13.

The relief claimed by the plaintiffs is that to declare them as legal heirs of deceased Khaja Shahabuddin. The purpose stated by the plaintiffs to file the present suit for declaration is that, for employment on compassionate grounds and for benefits and on their application, the concerned directed them to produce Legal Heir

Certificate evidencing that the plaintiffs are the legal heirs of late

Khaja Shahabuddin so as to provide employment and benefits. The documents under Ex.A1 discloses that Khaja Shahabuddin died on 15-08-2015 and Ex.A2, is clear that the plaintiffs are the family members of late Khaja Shahabuddin. The Ex.A13, discloses that the

Mahemudunnisa was directed to produce Legal Heir Certificate evidencing that the plaintiffs are the legal heirs of late Khaja

Shahabuddin so as to provide employment and benefits. The relief sought by the plaintiffs is that to declare them as legal heirs of deceased Khaja Shahabuddin. The Ex.A13, issued by the employer of the deceased gives raise cause of action for the plaintiffs to file this suit for declaration.

5 OF 5O.S.No. 1119 OF 2015

10.The plaintiffs by adducing oral evidence of PW1 and documentary evidence under Ex.A1 to Ex.A13, sufficiently established that they are the legal heirs of deceased Khaja

Shahabuddin. Thus, the plaintiffs are entitled for the relief of declaration as prayed for. Point is answered in favour of the plaintiffs.

In the result, the suit is decreed by declaring that the plaintiffs are the legal heirs of late Khaja Shahabuddin (Typed to my dictation, corrected and pronounced by me in the Open court, on this the 9th December, 2016)

F.A.C.VII ADDL.JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE,

WARANGAL.

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

WITNESSES EXAMINED

For Plaintiffs :- For Defendants:-

PW1: Mahemudunnisa -None-

EXHIBITS MARKED

For Plaintiffs:

Ex.A1: Original Death Certificate of Khaja Shahabuddin Ex.A2: Original Family Member Certificate Ex.A3: Bonafide Certificate of plaintiff No.3 Ex.A4: Conduct Certificate of plaintiff No.3 Ex.A5: Original Aadhar Card of late Khaja Shahabuddin Ex.A6: Original Aadhar Card of plaintiff No.1; Ex.A7: Original Aadhar Card of plaintiff No.4 Ex.A8: Original Aadhar Card of plaintiff No.2 Ex.A9: Original Aadhar Card of plaintiff No.3 Ex.A10: Original Household Card Ex.A11: Conduct Certificate of plaintiff No.2 Ex.A12: Bonafide Certificate of plaintiff No.2 Ex.A13: Letter, dated: 17-10-2015

For Defendants:- -Nil-

F.A.C.VII ADDL.JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE,

WARANGAL.

1 OF 5O.S.No. 1175 OF 2015

IN THE COURT OF THE II ADDITIONAL JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE,

WARANGAL.

Saturday, this the 1st day of October, 2016.

Present: Smt.Ch.Asha Latha, V-Additional Junior Civil Judge, F.A.C.II-Additional Junior Civil Judge, Warangal.

O.S.No. 1175 OF 2015

B E T W E E N:

Banka Sampath Kumar, S/o.Komuraiah, Age: 34 years, Occu: Business, R/o.H.No.2-4-947/1, Gokulnagar, Hanamkonda, Warangal district.

....Plaintiff

A N D

Alla Aruna, W/o.A.Raji Reddy, D/o.J.Adi Reddy, Age: 35 years, Occu: Housewife, R/o.Meerjampet village, Kalva Srirampur mandal, Karimnagar district, presently residing at 4-33(Plot), Krishna Colony, Bhupalpalli village and mandal, Warangal district.

…. Defendant * * * This suit is coming up before me on 02-09-2016 for final hearing in the presence of Sri R.Rama Mohan Rao, Advocate for plaintiff; and the defendant is set exparte; and after hearing and on perusing the material on record and having stood over for consideration till this day, this court delivered the following:

J U D G M E N T

1.This is a suit filed by the plaintiff for permanent injunction restraining the defendant and her men etc., from in any way interfering with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the plaintiff over the suit schedule property; and for costs of the suit.

The brief averments of the plaint are that :

2.The plaintiff is the owner and possessor of the suit schedule property i.e., 300 Sq.yards of open plot Nos.6 and 7 with tin shed bearing Door No.31-3-8/18/1/C out of Sy.No.877 (old),

Sy.No.830/ABCD (New) of Waddepally village at Hanamkonda, who purchased the same from its owner B.Shankar under a Registered 2 OF 5O.S.No. 1175 OF 2015

Sale Deed, dated: 23-04-2011 for valuable sale consideration, since then, the plaintiff has been enjoying the same without any interference. Subsequently, a Registered Rectification Deed was executed by the vendor by rectifying the boundaries on North and

South. The plaintiff obtained House construction permission on 16-08-2011; got constructed a tin shed room and obtained electricity connection. It is stated that the defendant who is stranger and no way concerned with the suit schedule property and has no right who by creating some false documents, has been interfering with the possession and enjoyment of the plaintiff by claiming her right in Plot No.7 of Sy.No.830/D (New) Waddepally village. The land claimed by the defendant is not available on spot, but the defendant is illegally interfering with the possession of the plaintiff and the plaintiff is apprehending threat of dispossession from the suit schedule property. On 18-11-2015, 20-11-2015 and 24-11-2015 the defendant with her men tried to dispossess the plaintiff from the schedule property illegally and that the plaintiff could able to retain his possession. The plaintiff approached Police

K.U.C. on 24-11-2015 who advised to approach the Civil court for legal remedy. Hence, this suit.

3.The defendant entered appearance, but failed to file her written statement, hence, she was set exparte.

4.Heard the learned counsel for the plaintiff.

5.Now the point for consideration is:

“Whether the plaintiff is entitled for permanent injunction as prayed for”?

3 OF 5O.S.No. 1175 OF 2015

6.POINT : This is a suit filed by the plaintiff for grant of permanent injunction restraining the defendant and her men from in any way interfering with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of plaintiff over the suit schedule house property i.e., 300 Sq.yards of open

Plot Nos.6 and 7 with tin shed bearing Door No.31-3-8/18/1/C out of

Sy.No.877 (old), Sy.No.830/ABCD (New) of Waddepally, Revenue village, Hanamkonda.

7.To prove his case, the plaintiff himself is examined as PW1 by filing his chief affidavit by reiterating the contents of his plaint. PW1 exhibited Ex.A1, Original Registered Sale Deed, dated:23-04-2011 executed by B.Shankar in his favour and Ex.A2, Original Registered

Deed of Declaration, dated: 06-02-2015 executed by B.Shankar;

Ex.A3 is the link document which is Original Registered Sale Deed,

dated:23-01-2005 executed by V.Batkamma @ Bakkamma in favour

of his vendor B.Shankar; Ex.A4, Original Registered Deed of

Rectification, dated: 09-02-2015 executed by B.Shankar in his favour; Subsequent to purchase of plaintiff, he mortgaged the schedule property with Kapil Chits; Ex.A5, Original Registered

Mortgage Deed, dated: 29-10-2011 evidencing the same. The

Ex.A6 and Ex.A7 are C.C.of Registered Sale Deed vide doc.No.350 of 1354 and doc.No.640 of 1354 Fasli along with Translation in English.

The Ex.A8, Permission Certificate, dated: 16-08-2011 issued by

Village Secretary, Komatipally Grampanchayath along with plan;

Ex.A9, Form of Spl.Notice of Increase of Property Tax, dated:23-06- 2015 issued by the Commissioner, Greater Warangal Municipal

Corporation; Ex.A10, Electricity Demand Notice and Payment

Receipt. The Ex.A11 and Ex.A12 are Photographs along with C.Ds.

The Ex.A13, Receipt of Deposit of Title Deeds, dated: 16-12-2014 4 OF 5O.S.No. 1175 OF 2015 executed by the Kapil Chits in his favour. The oral evidence of PW1 and Ex.A1 to Ex.A13 documentary evidence are remained unrebutted.

8.From a perusal of the unchallenged evidence of PW1 and Ex.A1 to Ex.A13, it is clear that the plaintiff is in possession and enjoyment of the suit schedule property and that the defendant is illegally interfering with the possession and enjoyment of the plaintiff over the suit schedule property. Hence, it is just and necessary to prevent the illegal interference of the defendant with the possession and enjoyment of the plaintiff over the suit schedule property by granting permanent injunction. Point is answered in favour of the plaintiff.

9.In the result, the suit is decreed by granting permanent injunction in favour of the plaintiff restraining the defendant from in any way interfering with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the plaintiff over the suit schedule property.

(Typed to my dictation, corrected and pronounced by me in open court, on this the 1st day of October, 2016)

F.A.C.II- ADDL.JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE,

WARANGAL.

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

WITNESSES EXAMINED

For Plaintiff:- For Defendant:

PW1: Banka Sampath Kumar None

EXHIBITS MARKED

For Plaintiff: Ex.A1: Original Registered Sale Deed, dated: 23-04-2011 Ex.A2: Original Registered Deed of Declaration, dated: 06-02-2015 Ex.A3: Original Registered Sale Deed, dated: 23-01-2005 Ex.A4: Original Registered Deed of Rectification, dated: 09-02-2015 Ex.A5: Original Registered Mortgage Deed, dated: 29-10-2011 Ex.A6: C.C.of Registered Sale Deed vide doc.No.350 of 1354 Fasli Ex.A7: C.C.of Registered Sale Deed vide doc.No.640 of 1354 Fasli 5 OF 5O.S.No. 1175 OF 2015

Ex.A8: Permission Certificate, dated: 16-08-2011 along with Plan Ex.A9: Form of Spl.Notice of Increase of Property Tax,

dated: 23-06-2015

Ex.A10: Electricity Demand Notice and Payment Receipt Ex.A11: Photographs (9 Nos.) along with C.D Ex.A12: Photographs (10 Nos.) along with C.D Ex.A13: Receipt of Deposit of Title Deeds, dated: 16-12-2014

For Defendant:- -Nil-

F.A.C.II- ADDL.JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE,

WARANGAL.

1 OF 4 O.S.No.450 OF 2016

IN THE COURT OF VII - ADDITIONAL JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE,

WARANGAL.

Wednesday, this the 14th day of December, 2016.

Present:- Smt. Ch. Asha Latha, V-Additional Junior Civil Judge, F.A.C. VII-Additional Junior Civil Judge, Warangal.

O.S.No. 450 OF 2016

B E T W E E N

1. Saleeha Begum, W/o.Late Mohammed Mahmood Khan, Age: 45 years, Occu: Housewife, R/o.H.No.7-5-38, Kapuwada, Alankar, Hanamkonda, Warangal district.

2. Nazia Khatoon, D/o.Late Mohammed Mahmood Khan, W/o.Late Syed Hussain, Age: 23 years, Occu: Housewife, R/o.H.No.7-5-38, Kapuwada, Alankar, Hanamkonda, Warangal district.

3. Mohammed Javeed Khan, S/o.Late Mohammed Mahmood Khan, Age: 22 years, Occu: Coolie, R/o.H.No.7-5-38, Kapuwada, Alankar, Hanamkonda, Warangal district.

4. Tharannum Khatoon, D/o.Late Mohammed Mahmood Khan, Age: 19 years, Occu: Student, R/o.H.No.7-5-38, Kapuwada, Alankar, Hanamkonda, Warangal district.

5. Rehana Khatoon, D/o.Late Mohammed Mahmood Khan, Age: 15 years, Occu: Student, being minor represented by her natural mother as guardian i.e., plaintiff No.1; R/o.H.No.7-5-38, Kapuwada, Alankar, Hanamkonda, Warangal district.

… Plaintiffs

A N D

1. To whomsoever it may concern

2. The State of A.P., represented by the District Collector, Warangal. …Defendants

* * *

This suit is coming up before me on 06-12-2016 for final hearing in the presence of Sri E.Rajashekhar Reddy, Advocate for plaintiffs; and of the defendant No.2 is set exparte; and the suit against the defendant No.1 is dismissed for default; and upon hearing and on perusing the material on record and having the matter stood over for consideration this Court has made the following:

2 OF 4 O.S.No.450 OF 2016

J U D G M E N T

1.This is a suit filed by the plaintiffs, to declare them as legal heirs to the estate of deceased Mohammed Mahmood Khan.

The brief averments of the plaint are that :

2.The plaintiff No.1 is wife of late Mohammed Mahmood Khan. The plaintiff Nos.2 to 5 are children of plaintiff No.1 and late

Mohammed Mahmood Khan. The marriage of plaintiff No.2 was performed with one Mohammed Syed Hussain who died on 30-11- 2014 leaving behind the plaintiff No.2 and his two children, since then, the plaintiff No.2 is residing at her parents house. During the life time of deceased Mohammed Mahmood Khan, he went to Saudi

Arabia about 20 years back and worked as Driver. The Mohammed

Mahmood Khan died on 28-06-2015 while in service by leaving behind the plaintiffs as his legal heirs. It is stated that due to the bad financial condition, the plaintiffs have not at all taken steps to bring the dead body of the deceased Mohammed Mahmood Khan to

India and that accordingly, the Embassy of India, Riyadh send

Proceedings, dated: 13-12-2015 with regard to issuance of death benefits / insurance amount to the estate of deceased Mohammed

Mahmood Khan. The plaintiffs made several requests to release the

Insurance claim, but the concerned Authorities directed to produce the legal heir certificate from the competent Court. Hence, this suit.

3.The defendant No.2 is set exparte. The suit against the defendant No.1 is dismissed for default.

4.Now the point for consideration is:

“Whether the plaintiff Nos.1 to 5 are entitled for the

relief of declaration as prayed for”?

3 OF 4 O.S.No.450 OF 2016

5.During the course of Trial, on behalf of the plaintiffs, plaintiff

No.1 is examined as PW1 and Ex.A1 to Ex.A5 are marked.

6.Heard the learned counsel for the plaintiffs.

7.POINT: This is a suit filed by the plaintiffs to declare them as legal heirs to the estate of deceased Mohammed Mahmood Khan. It is the case of the plaintiffs that during the life time of the deceased

Mohammed Mahmood Khan, he worked as Driver in Saudi Arabia who died on 28-06-2015 while in service by leaving the plaintiffs as his legal heirs and that the plaintiffs approached for insurance claim, but the authorities are directed to produce legal heir certificate from the Court of Law. Hence, this suit.

8. To prove their case, the plaintiff No.1 is examined as PW1 by filing her chief affidavit by reiterating the contents of plaint. PW1 exhibited Ex.A1, Letter, dated: 13-01-2016 from the District

Collector to the Tahsildar, Hanamkonda mandal; Ex.A2, Letter,

dated:25-02-2016 from the District Collector to the Tahsildar,

Hanamkonda mandal; Ex.A3, Bank Passbook of PW1 with S.B.H.;

Ex.A4, Original Household Card and Ex.A5, Original Aadhar Card of

PW1. The oral evidence of PW1 and Ex.A1 to Ex.A5 are remained unrebutted.

9. From a perusal of the unchallenged evidence of PW1, Ex.A1 to

Ex.A5, it is clear that the plaintiff No.1 is wife, plaintiff Nos.2 to 5 are children of deceased Mohammed Mahmood Khan. The recitals in

Ex.A1 are that the deceased Mohammed Mahmood Khan died in

Saudi Arabia and requested to disburse the amount to the legal heirs as per the given address. The address is of plaintiff No.1. It is 4 OF 4 O.S.No.450 OF 2016 further clear that the District collector directed the Tahsildar,

Hanamkonda to inform the plaintiff No.1 to obtain legal heir certificate from the Court for taking necessary action and for report of Tahsildar. The recitals in Ex.A2 are that a Cheque No.990645,

dated: 08-12-2015 for Rs.3,47,826/- with S.B.H. pertaining to legal

dues in respect of late Mohammed Mahmood Khan and request to disburse the said amount to all the legal heirs after due verification.

The Ex.A1 and Ex.A2 gives raise cause of action for the plaintiffs to file the present suit for declaration. The plaintiff No.1 by examining herself as PW1 and by exhibiting Ex.A1 to Ex.A5 documents, sufficiently established that the plaintiffs are legal heirs of late

Mohammed Mahmood Khan. Thus, the plaintiffs are are entitled for the relief of declaration, as prayed for. Point is answered in favour of the plaintiffs.

10. I n the result, the suit is decreed by declaring the plaintiffs are the legal heirs to the estate of deceased Mohammed Mahmood

Khan.

(Typed to my dictation, corrected and pronounced by me in the open court on this the 14th day of December, 2016)

F.A.C.VII-ADDL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE,

WARANGAL

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

WITNESSES EXAMINED

FOR PLAINTIFFS: FOR DEFENDANTS:

PW1: Saleeha BegumNone

EXHIBITS MARKED

FOR PLAINTIFFS:

Ex.A1: Letter, dated: 13-01-2016 Ex.A2: Letter, dated: 25-02-2016 Ex.A3: Bank Passbook of Plaintiff No.1 Ex.A4: Original Household Card Ex.A5: Original Aadhar Card of PW1

FOR DEFENDANTS: Nil

F.A.C.VII-ADDL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE,

WARANGAL.

1 OF 4O.S.No.526 OF 2016

IN THE COURT OF THE II ADDITIONAL JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE,

WARANGAL.

Saturday, this the 1st day of October, 2016.

Present: Smt. Ch.Asha Latha, V-Additional Junior Civil Judge, F.A.C.II-Additional Junior Civil Judge, Warangal.

O.S.No. 526 OF 2016

B E T W E E N

Pallam Nagaraju, S/o.P.Chandramouly, Age: 30 years, Occu: Out Sourcing work, R/o.H.No.7-7-278/1/A, Kapuwada, Hanamkonda, Warangal district.

....Plaintiff

A N D

1. Mohd.Saleem, S/o.Late Mohd.Yakub, Age: 56 years, Occu: Driver working in the Office of Director of Public Health and Family Welfare, Warangal Zone at Sulthan Bazaar, Koti, Hyderabad, Telangana State, R/o.H.No.5-1-138, Kothur Street, Hanamkonda, Warangal district.

2. Godishala Bhanu Prakash, S/o.G.Mallesham, Age: 49 years, Occu: Junior Assistant, Working in Regional Director of District Medical and Health Services, Warangal district, now working in B.Sc. Nursing Hostel, Kakatiya Medical College, Warangal Campus, Warangal.

…. Defendants * * * This suit is coming up before me on 27-09-2016 for final hearing in the presence of Sri Mohd.Yakub Ali, Advocate for plaintiff; the defendants are set ex parte; and after hearing the counsel for the plaintiff and after perusing the material on record and having stood over for consideration till this day, this court delivered the following:

J U D G M E N T

1. This is a suit filed for recovery of Rs.81,200/- against the defendants on the foot of a promissory note; and for costs of the suit.

The brief averments of the plaint are that:

2.The plaintiff and defendants are acquainted with each other since two years. Due to such acquaintance, the defendant No.1 2 OF 4O.S.No.526 OF 2016 borrowed an amount of Rs.1,00,000/- on 13-08-2014 to perform his daughter's marriage by executing a Promissory Note on the same day by agreeing to repay the said amount together with interest @ 2% per month. The defendant No.2 stood as guarantor for the liability of the defendant No.1 and signed on surety bond of the said

Promissory Note. Subsequently, the defendant No.1 has repaid an amount of Rs.10,000/- per month from October, 2014 to January, 2015 for four months. Later the plaintiff approached the defendant

No.1 on 19-04-2015 and 13-09-2015 and demanded to repay the balance amount with interest, but the defendant No.1 did not repay the same. Later, on 13-12-2015 the plaintiff along with the defendant No.2 approached the defendant No.1 to repay the balance amount of Rs.60,000/-, but of no use. Subsequently, the plaintiff got issued Legal Notice, dated:23-05-2016, but the defendant No.1 did not receive the said legal notice. Hence, this suit.

3.The defendants were set ex parte.

4.Heard the learned counsel for the plaintiff.

5.Now the point for consideration is:- “Whether the plaintiff is entitled for recovery of suit amount as prayed for”?

6.POINT:- This is a suit filed by the plaintiff for recovery of

Rs.81,200/- against the defendants. To prove his case, the plaintiff himself is examined as PW1 and he filed his chief affidavit by reiterating the contents of his plaint and he exhibited Ex.A1, Original

Promissory Note, dated: 13-08-2014 along with Receipt; Ex.A2,

Office copy of Legal Notice, dated: 23-05-2016 along with Postal 3 OF 4O.S.No.526 OF 2016 receipts; Ex.A3, Returned Postal cover of defendant No.1; Ex.A4,

Returned Postal cover of defendant No.1; Ex.A5, Postal

Acknowledgement of defendant No.2 and Ex.A6, Guarantee Bond executed by the defendant No.2 on 13-08-2014 (duly impounded).

The oral evidence of PW1 and Ex.A1 to Ex.A6 documentary evidence are remained unrebutted.

7.From a perusal of unchallenged evidence of PW1, Ex.A1 to Ex.A6, it is clear that the defendant No.1 has borrowed an amount of

Rs.1,00,000/- from the plaintiff and executed a Promissory Note by agreeing to repay the same along with interest and that the defendant No.2 stood as guarantor for the said liability.

Subsequently, the defendant No.1 has repaid an amount of

Rs.10,000/- per month from October, 2014 to January, 2015 for four months and failed to repay the remaining amount of Rs.60,000/- with interest in spite of several demands and even after Ex.A2 legal notice issued by the plaintiff. Thus, the defendants are liable to pay the suit amount to the plaintiff and that the plaintiff is entitled to recover the same. Point is answered in favour of the plaintiff.

8.In the result, the suit is decreed with costs directing the defendants to pay Rs. 81,200/- to the plaintiff with interest @ 12% per annum from the date of the suit to till the date of decree and thereafter @ 6% per annum from the date of decree till realization on the principal amount of Rs.60,000/-.

(Typed to my dictation, corrected and pronounced by me in the Open court on this the 1st day of October, 2016)

F.A.C.II ADDL.JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE,

WARANGAL.

4 OF 4O.S.No.526 OF 2016

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

WITNESSES EXAMINED

F or Plaintiff :- For Defendants:-

PW1: Pallam Nagaraju -None-

EXHIBITS MARKED

For Plaintiff:

Ex.A1: Original Promissory Note, dated: 13-08-2014 along with Receipt Ex.A2: Office copy of Legal Notice, dated: 23-05-2016 along with postal receipts Ex.A3: Returned Postal cover of defendant No.1 Ex.A4: Returned Postal cover of defendant No.1 Ex.A5: Postal Acknowledgement of defendant No.2 Ex.A6: Guarantee Bond, dated: 13-08-2014 executed by the defendant No.2 (duly impounded)

For Defendants:- -Nil-

F.A.C.II ADDL.JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE,

WARANGAL.