Sri Ch. Venkata Naga Srinivasa Rao

Senior Civil Judge, Sattenapalli

II Addl JCJ Court, Sattenapalli · Guntur · Andhra Pradesh

Sri Ch. Venkata Naga Srinivasa Rao, Senior Civil Judge, Sattenapalli, is posted at II Addl JCJ Court, Sattenapalli, Guntur, Andhra Pradesh, India. 210 court orders on record since 2024. 5 judgments with full text available. Primarily handles H, OS, IP cases.

210

Total Orders

Judgments

Orders/Month

Posting

Featured Judgments

H.M.O.P/50/2024

Avvari venkata Lakshmi alias Komali vs Avaari Arun Kumar

23 Oct 2024

In the Court of the Civil Judge (Senior Division): Sattenapalli,

Present:-Sri Ch. Venkata Naga Srinivasa Rao,

Civil Judge (Senior Division), Sattenapalli,

Wednesday, this the 23rd day of October, 2024,

HMOP No.50 of 2024

Between:

Avvari Venkata Lakshmi @ Komali, W/o.Arun Kumar, D/o.Kakumanu Mutyala Rao, Hindu, 24 years, Housewife, R/o.D. No.4-525/1, Halia,

Anumula Mandal, nalgonda District, Telangana State. ...Petitioner

And

Avvari Arun Kumar, S/o.Jayanna, Hindu, 30 yeas, Motor Mechanic, R/o.D. No.1-151, Rajiv Nagar Colony, Atchempet and Mandal,

Palnadu District. ...Respondent

This petition came before this Court on 22.10.2024 for final hearing in the presence of Sri V. Papa Rao, Advocate for the petitioner and respondent remained ex parte and having stood over for consideration till this day, the Court delivered the following:

O R D E R

This petition is filed under Sec.13(I) (ia) (ib) of Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 by the petitioner seeking the Court to grant decree of divorce by dissolving her marriage with the respondent held on 06.11.2021 and costs of the petition.

2) The brief averments of the petition are as follows:

The petitioner is legally wedded wife of the respondent and their marriage took place on 06.11.2021 at the parental house of the respondent at Atchampet village and Mandal, Palnadu District, as per Hindu Rites and Caste Customs. The parents of the petitioner gave cash of Rs.50,000/-, one sovereign gold chain and also house hold articles worh Rs.50,000/- to the respondent on the demand of respondent and his parents. The petitioner joined the respondent at the house of the respondent in Atchampet village and Mandal to lead marital life. Both the petitioner and the respondent lived together for a period of ten days and later the respondent addicted to bad vices, started harassment towards the petitioner both mentally and physically by demanding her for additional dowry for consuming liquor. The petitioner expressed her inability for such demand. But the respondent 2 and the family members of the respondent did not mend their ways and continuing their harassment in the same manner. Finally, the petitioner requested the respondent and the family members of the respondent not to demand the

additional dowry as her parents are unable to pay such huge amount as additional

dowry. But the respondent and family members of the respondent did not heed her words and intensified the harassment both mentally and physically and the respondent used to beat her severally and finally they necked out the petitioner from their house on 20.01.2022. The petitioner and her parents made mediation through them and elders namely Kondaveeti Ramachandra Rao and Sk. Nabhi, but the respondent and his family members did not mend their ways and bluntly refused to bring back the petitioner without giving additional dowry. The petitioner also came to conclusion that there is no chance in future to lead happy matrimonial life with the respondent. The petitioner also vexed with the attitude of the respondent. In view of the same, the petitioner also decided to dissolve her marital tie with the respondent. Hence, the petition.

3) Even though notice was served on the respondent for his appearance, he was called absent and no representation was made and as such this Court set the respondent ex parte and proceeded with the matter.

4) On the strength of the above, the point to be determined is:

“Whether the petitioner is entitled to divorce from the respondent by

dissolving her marriage with the respondent held on 06.11.2021?”

5) To substantiate the case of the petitioner, the petitioner examined herself as PW.1 and got exhibited Exs.P1 and P2.

6)Heard the learned counsel for petitioner.

7) POINT:

i)The learned counsel for the petitioner has reiterated the petition averments in his arguments and prayed to decree the petition.

3 ii) To substantiate the case of the petitioner, the petitioner examined herself as PW.1, who filed her affidavit in lieu of her examination-in-chef wherein she reiterated the petition averments and as such examination-in-chief of P.W.1 is nothing but replica of the petition. In addition to that, she also exhibited

Exs.P.1 and P2. Ex.P1 is the wedding card of the petitioner and the respondent. Ex.P2 is the compared copy of Aadhar card. As per the evidence of PW.1 coupled Ex.P.1, it seems that the marriage of the petitioner with the respondent took place on 06.11.2021 at the house of the respondent in Atchampet village and Mandal, which falls within the jurisdiction of this Court. The evidence of P.W.1 that she was subjected to cruelty by the respondent has been intact and un-rebutted, which would suffice to attract Section 13(1) (ia) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, which is one of the grounds to grant decree of divorce. It is the consistent evidence of P.W.1 that finally the respondent necked out the petitioner from the matrimonial home on 20.01.2022 and she has been residing with her parents from then onwards has been in tact and un-rebutted, which makes this Court to come to conclusion that the petitioner was deserted by the respondent on 20.01.2022, which makes this court to come to conclusion that the petitioner was deserted about more than two years immediately preceding the presenting of the petition as the petition was filed on 02.04.2024 and she has been residing with her parents, which would suffice to satisfy Section 13(1)(ib) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 and which is one of the grounds to grant decree of divorce. As per the consistent evidence of PW.1, there is no chance for reunion of the petitioner with the respondent and as such the petitioner has successfully proved her case and is entitled to have decree of divorce by dissolving her marriage with the respondent took place on 06.11.2021.

Hence, the point is answered accordingly.

8)In the result, HMOP is allowed granting decree of divorce to the petitioner with the respondent by dissolving their marriage took place between them on 06.11.2021, no costs.

Typed to my dictation by the Stenographer, corrected and

pronounced by me in the open Court this the 23rd day of October, 2024.

Civil Judge (Senior Division),

Sattenapalli.

Appendix of Evidence

Witnesses examined

For Petitioner : For Respondent:

PW.1:Avvari Venkata Lakshmi. NONE

Documents Marked

For Petitioner : For Respondent: Nil

Ex.P1: Wedding card Ex.P2:Compared copy of Aadhar card.

C J (Sr. D)., SAP.,

// True Copy //

H.M.O.P/42/2024

Patibandla alias Nimmagadda Aruna vs Patibandla Narasimha Rao

23 Oct 2024

In the Court of the Civil Judge (Senior Division): Sattenapalli,

Present:-Sri Ch. Venkata Naga Srinivasa Rao,

Civil Judge (Senior Division), Sattenapalli,

Wednesday, this the 23rd day of October, 2024,

HMOP No.42 of 2024

Between:

Patibandla @ Nimmagadda Aruna, W/o.Patibandla Narasimha Rao, D/o.Late Nimmagadda Rathaiah, Hindu, 40 years, R/o.D. No.2-64, C/o.Nimmagadda Rama Rao, Panidam Village, Sattenapalli Mandal,

Palnadu District. ...Petitioner

And

Patibandla Narasimha Rao, S/o.Late Bhimaiah, Hindu, 44 years,

R/o.Pedapalem Village, Atchampet Mandal, Palnadu District. ...Respondent

This petition came before this Court on 22.10.2024 for final hearing in the presence of Sri Ch. Srinivasa Rao, Advocate for the petitioner and respondent remained ex parte and having stood over for consideration till this day, the Court delivered the following:

O R D E R

2) The brief averments of the petition are as follows:

The petitioner is legally wedded wife of the respondent and their marriage took place on 10.06.2003 at the parental house of the petitioner at Panidam village,

Sattenapalli Mandal, Palnadu District, as per Hindu Rites and Caste Customs. The petitioner joined the respondent at the house of the respondent in Pedapalem village of Atchampet Mandal to lead marital life. Both the petitioner and the respondent lived together amicably for a period of eight years. During their wedlock the petitioner was blessed a male child and a female child and later the respondent addicted to bad vices, started harassment towards the petitioner both mentally and physically by demanding her for additional dowry. The petitioner expressed her inability for such demand. But the respondent and the family members of the respondent did not mend their ways and continuing their 2 harassment in the same manner. Finally, the petitioner requested the respondent and the family members of the respondent not to demand the additional dowry as her parents are unable to pay such huge amount as additional dowry. But the respondent and family members of the respondent did not heed her words and intensified the harassment both mentally and physically and the respondent used to beat her severally and finally they necked out the petitioner from their house on03.10.2015. The petitioner and her parents made mediation through them and elders, but the respondent and his family members did not mend their ways and bluntly refused to bring back the petitioner without giving additional dowry. The petitioner also came to conclusion that there is no chance in future to lead happy matrimonial life with the respondent. The petitioner also vexed with the attitude of the respondent. In view of the same, the petitioner also decided to dissolve her marital tie with the respondent. Hence, the petition.

4) On the strength of the above, the point to be determined is:

“Whether the petitioner is entitled to divorce from the respondent by

dissolving her marriage with the respondent held on 10.06.2003?”

5) To substantiate the case of the petitioner, the petitioner examined herself as PW.1 and got exhibited Exs.P1 and P2.

6)Heard the learned counsel for petitioner.

7) POINT:

i)The learned counsel for the petitioner has reiterated the petition averments in his arguments and prayed to decree the petition.

3 ii) To substantiate the case of the petitioner, the petitioner examined herself as

PW.1, who filed her affidavit in lieu of her examination-in-chef wherein she reiterated the petition averments and as such examination-in-chief of P.W.1 is nothing but replica of the petition. In addition to that, she also exhibited

Exs.P.1 and P2. Ex.P1 is the wedding card of the petitioner and the respondent. Ex.P2 is the compared copy of Aadhar card. As per the evidence of PW.1 coupled Ex.P.1, it seems that the marriage of the petitioner with the respondent took place on 10.06.2003 at the house of the petitioner in Padinam village of Sattenapalli Mandal, which falls within the jurisdiction of this Court. The evidence of P.W.1 that she was subjected to cruelty by the respondent has been intact and un-rebutted, which would suffice to attract Section 13(1) (ia) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, which is one of the grounds to grant decree of divorce. It is the consistent evidence of P.W.1 that finally the respondent necked out the petitioner from the matrimonial home on 03.10.2015 and she has been residing with her parents from then onwards has been in tact and un- rebutted, which makes this Court to come to conclusion that the petitioner was deserted by the respondent on 03.10.2015, which makes this court to come to conclusion that the petitioner was deserted about more than two years immediately preceding the presenting of the petition as the petition was filed on 22.02.2024 and she has been residing with her parents, which would suffice to satisfy Section 13(1)(ib) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 and which is one of the grounds to grant decree of divorce. As per the consistent evidence of PW.1, there is no chance for reunion of the petitioner with the respondent and as such the petitioner has successfully proved her case and is entitled to have decree of divorce by dissolving her marriage with the respondent took place on 10.06.2003. Hence, the point is answered accordingly.

8)In the result, HMOP is allowed granting decree of divorce to the petitioner with the respondent by dissolving their marriage took place between them on 10.06.2003, no costs.

Typed to my dictation by the Stenographer, corrected and

pronounced by me in the open Court this the 23rd day of October, 2024.

Civil Judge (Senior Division),

Sattenapalli.

Appendix of Evidence

Witnesses examined

For Petitioner : For Respondent:

PW.1:Patibandla @ Nimmagadda Aruna.NONE

Documents Marked

For Petitioner : For Respondent: Nil

Ex.P1: Wedding card Ex.P2:Compared copy of Aadhar card.

C J (Sr. D)., SAP.,

// True Copy //

H.M.O.P/121/2021

Munagoti Dhanalakshmi vs Munagoti Sambasiva Rao

23 Oct 2024

In the Court of the Civil Judge (Senior Division): Sattenapalli,

Present:-Sri Ch. Venkata Naga Srinivasa Rao,

Civil Judge (Senior Division), Sattenapalli,

Wednesday, this the 23rd day of October, 2024,

HMOP No.121 of 2021

Between:

Munagoti Dhana Lakshmi, W/o.Samba Siva Rao, Hindu, 36 years, Housewife, R/o.D. No.2-66, 75 Tyalluru Village, Pedakurapadu Mandal, Guntur District. …Petitioner AND

Munagori Samba Siva Rao, S/o.Tirapathaiah, Hindu, 45 years, Agriculture, R/o.Flat No.G-1, Rupa Residency, Road No.6, Tirumala Nagar, Vadlapoodi, Visakhapatnam and District. …Respondent

This petition came before this Court on 22.10.2024 for final hearing in the presence of Sri Baggi Narasimha Rao, Advocate for the petitioner and respondent remained ex parte and having stood over for consideration till this day, the Court delivered the following:

O R D E R

2) The brief averments of the petition are as follows:

The petitioner is legally wedded wife of the respondent and their marriage took place on 23.05.1993 at the parents house of the respondent in 75 Tyalluru

Village, Pedakurapadu Mandal, as per Hindu Rites and Caste Customs. The petitioner joined the respondent at the house of the respondent in 75 Tyalluru village to lead marital life. Both the petitioner and the respondent lived together amicably and out of the wedlock they blessed with a male child by name Munagoti

Gopi Raju on 30.01.1995 and a girl child by name on Munagoti Lakshmi and later the respondent addicted to bad vices and started harassment towards the petitioner both mentally and physically by demanding her for additional dowry. The petitioner expressed her inability. But the respondent and the family members of the respondent did not mend their ways and continuing their harassment in the 2 same manner. Finally, the petitioner requested the respondent and the family members of the respondent not to demand the additional dowry as her parents are unable to pay such huge amount as additional dowry. But the respondent and family members of the respondent did not heed her words and intensified the harassment both mentally and physically and the respondent used to beat her severally and finally the respondent leff the company of the petitioner from the house in the month of May, 2009. The petitioner also came to conclusion that there is no chance in future to lead happy matrimonial life with the respondent.

The petitioner also vexed with the attitude of the respondent. In view of the same, the petitioner also decided to dissolve her marital tie with the respondent. Hence, the petition.

4) On the strength of the above, the point to be determined is:

“Whether the petitioner is entitled to divorce from the respondent by

dissolving her marriage with the respondent held on 23.05.1993?”

5) To substantiate the case of the petitioner, the petitioner examined herself as PW.1 and got exhibited Exs.P1 to P3.

6)Heard the learned counsel for petitioner.

7) POINT:

i)The learned counsel for the petitioner has reiterated the petition averments in his arguments and prayed to decree the petition.

ii) To substantiate the case of the petitioner, the petitioner examined herself as

PW.1, who filed her affidavit in lieu of her examination-in-chef wherein she reiterated the petition averments and as such examination-in-chief of P.W.1 is 3 nothing but replica of the petition. In addition to that, she also exhibited

Exs.P.1 to P3. Ex.P1 is the wedding card of the petitioner and the respondent. Ex.P2 is the health card issued by the government. Ex.P3 is the compared copy of Aadhar card. As per the evidence of PW.1 coupled Ex.P.1, it seems that the marriage of the petitioner with the respondent took place on 23.05.1993 at the parental house of the respondent at 75 Tyalluru village of Pedakurapadu Mandal, which falls within the jurisdiction of this Court. The evidence of P.W.1 that she was subjected to cruelty by the respondent has been intact and un-rebutted, which would suffice to attract Section 13(1) (ia) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, which is one of the grounds to grant decree of divorce. It is the consistent evidence of P.W.1 that finally the respondent left the house of the petitioner in the month of May, 2009 and she has been residing with her parents from then onwards has been in tact and un-rebutted, which makes this Court to come to conclusion that the petitioner was deserted by the respondent in the month of May, 2009, which makes this court to come to conclusion that the petitioner was deserted about more than two years immediately preceding the presenting of the petition as the petition was filed on 20.09.2021 and she has been residing with her parents, which would suffice to satisfy Section 13(1)(ib) of the Hindu

Marriage Act, 1955 and which is one of the grounds to grant decree of divorce. As per the consistent evidence of PW.1, there is no chance for reunion of the petitioner with the respondent and as such the petitioner has successfully proved her case and is entitled to have decree of divorce by dissolving her marriage with the respondent took place on 23.05.1993. Hence, the point is answered accordingly.

8)In the result, HMOP is allowed granting divorce to the petitioner with the respondent by dissolving their marriage took place between them on 23.05.1993, no costs.

Typed to my dictation by the Stenographer, corrected and

pronounced by me in the open Court this, the 23rd day of October, 2024.

Civil Judge (Senior Division),

Sattenapalli.

Appendix of Evidence

Witnesses examined

For Petitioner : For Respondent:

PW.1:Munagoti Dhanalakshmi.NONE

Documents Marked

For Petitioner : For Respondent: Nil

Ex.P1: Wedding card Ex.P2-Copy of Health card issued by the government, Ex.P3:Compared copy of Aadhar card.

C J (Sr. D)., SAP.,

// True Copy //

H.M.O.P/83/2024

Gunturu Sri Anjaneyulu vs Gunturu alias Ramisetty Bavya Sri

23 Oct 2024

In the Court of the Civil Judge (Senior Division): Sattenapalli,

Present:-Sri Ch. Venkata Naga Srinivasa Rao,

Civil Judge (Senior Division), Sattenapalli,

Tuesday, this the 23rd day of October, 2024,

HMOP No.83 of 2024

Between:

Gunturu Sri Anjaneyulu, S/o.Venkateswara Rao, 30 years, Hindu, Unemployee, R/o.D. No.12-17/1, Pallapuveedhi, Amaravathi and Mandal, Palnadu District. …Petitioner AND

Gunturu @ Raamisetti Bhavya Sri, W/o.Anjaneyulu, D/o.Srinivasa Rao, Hindu, 24 years, Housewife, R/o.D. No.1-5, Anaasagaram Village, Nandigama Mandal, Krishna district. …Respondent

This petition came before this Court on 21.10.2024 for final hearing in the presence of Sri Mekala Venkateswara Rao, Advocate for the petitioner and respondent remained ex parte and having stood over for consideration till this day, the Court delivered the following:

O R D E R

This petition is filed under Sec.13 (I) (ia) (v) of Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 by the petitioner seeking the Court to grant decree of divorce by dissolving his marriage with the respondent held on 09.12.2021 and costs of the petition.

2) The brief averments of the petition are as follows:

The respondent is legally wedded wife of the petitioner and their marriage took place on 09.12.2021 at Sri Panduranga Swami Vari Devasthanam,

Amaravathi, as per Hindu Rites and Caste Customs. The respondent joined the petitioner at the house of the petitioner in Amaravathi to lead marital life. Both the petitioner and the respondent lived together amicably for one and half year at

Amaravathi and later the respondent picked up quarrel and adamant towards the petitioner without any reasonable cause, harassed the petitioner both physically and mentally abused the petitioner by touching the income of the petitioner. The petitioner doing small soda business on roadside. The respondent pressurized the petitioner to purchase luxurious articles. But the respondent and the family members of the respondent did not mend their ways and continuing their harassment in the same manner towards the petitioner. Finally, the petitioner 2 requested the respondent and the family members of the respondent not to demand such type of things. But the respondent and family members of the respondent did not heed her words and intensified the harassment both mentally and physically and the respondent went to her parental house on 14.12.2023 in the fifth month of pregnancy and did not come back till then. The mediation made between the petitioner and respondent through elders and mediators proved futile.

The petitioner also came to conclusion that there is no chance in future to lead happy matrimonial life with the respondent. The petitioner also vexed with the attitude of the respondent. In view of the same, the petitioner also decided to dissolve his marital tie with the respondent. Hence, the petition.

3) Even though notice was served on the respondent for her appearance, she was called absent and no representation was made and as such this Court set the respondent ex parte and proceeded with the matter.

4) On the strength of the above, the point to be determined is:

“Whether the petitioner is entitled to divorce from the respondent by

dissolving his marriage with the respondent held on 09.12.2021?”

5) To substantiate the case of the petitioner, the petitioner examined himself as PW.1 and got exhibited Exs.P1 to P5.

6)Heard the learned counsel for petitioner.

7) POINT:

i)The learned counsel for the petitioner has reiterated the petition averments in his arguments and prayed to decree the petition.

ii) To substantiate the case of the petitioner, the petitioner examined himself as PW.1, who filed his affidavit in lieu of his examination-in-chef wherein he reiterated the petition averments and as such examination-in-chief of P.W.1 is nothing but replica of the petition. In addition to that, he also exhibited

Exs.P.1 to P5. Ex.P1 is the wedding card of the petitioner and the 3 respondent. Ex.P2 is the medical report of the petitioner. Ex.P3 is the office copy of legal notice dated 03.07.2024 got issued by the petitioner to the respondent. Ex.P4 is the postal receipt dated 12.09.2022 and

Ex.P5 is the postal track consignment downloaded from the India Post.

As per the evidence of PW.1 coupled Ex.P.1, it seems that the marriage of the petitioner with the respondent took place on 09.12.2021 at Sri

Panduranga Swami Vari Devasthanam, Amaravathi, which falls within the jurisdiction of this Court. The evidence of P.W.1 that he was subjected to cruelty by the respondent has been intact and un-rebutted, which would suffice to attract Section 13(1) (ia) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, which is one of the grounds to grant decree of divorce. It is the consistent evidence of P.W.1 that finally the respondent went to her parental home from the matrimonial home on 14.12.2023 and she has been residing with her parents from then onwards has been in tact and un-rebutted, which makes this Court to come to conclusion that the petitioner was deserted by the respondent on 14.12.2023. As per the consistent evidence of PW.1, there is no chance for reunion of the petitioner with the respondent and as such the petitioner has successfully proved his case and is entitled to have decree of divorce by dissolving his marriage with the respondent took place on 09.12.2021.

Hence, the point is answered accordingly.

8)In the result, HMOP is allowed granting decree of divorce to the petitioner with the respondent by dissolving their marriage took place between them on 09.12.2021, no costs.

Typed to my dictation by the Stenographer, corrected and

pronounced by me in the open Court this the 23rd day of October, 2024.

Civil Judge (Senior Division),

Sattenapalli.

Appendix of Evidence

Witnesses examined

For Petitioner : For Respondent:

PW.1:gunturu Sri Anjaneyulu. - Exparte -

Documents Marked

For Petitioner : For Respondent: Nil

Ex.P1:Wedding card, Ex.P2:Medical report of the petitioner, Ex.P3:Office copy of legal ntoice dated 03.07.2024, Ex.P4:Postal receipt dated 12.09.2022, Ex.P5:Postal tract consignment downloaded from the India post.

C J (Sr. D)., SAP.,

// True Copy //

H.M.O.P/160/2023

Ramavath Koteswari Bai vs Ramavath Ravi Naik

23 Oct 2024

Order Record 192 total

Case No.	Parties	Date	Type	Outcome
H.M.O.P/42/2024	Patibandla alias Nimmagadda Aruna vs Patibandla Narasimha Rao	23 Oct 2024	Order	—
H.M.O.P/50/2024	Avvari venkata Lakshmi alias Komali vs Avaari Arun Kumar	23 Oct 2024	Order	—
H.M.O.P/83/2024	Gunturu Sri Anjaneyulu vs Gunturu alias Ramisetty Bavya Sri	23 Oct 2024	Order	—
H.M.O.P/121/2021	Munagoti Dhanalakshmi vs Munagoti Sambasiva Rao	23 Oct 2024	Order	—
H.M.O.P/160/2023	Ramavath Koteswari Bai vs Ramavath Ravi Naik	23 Oct 2024	Order	—
OS/20/2024	Varikallu Murali Krishna vs Guntanala Ramulu	22 Oct 2024	Judgement	—
H.M.O.P/98/2024	Yannam Sridevi vs Yannam Suryanarayana Reddy	22 Oct 2024	Order	—
EP/94/2015	Cherukuri Ramesh Babu vs Katta Hari Babu	21 Oct 2024	Other	—
SC/30/2024	SHO Amaravathi vs Avvula Rambabu	21 Oct 2024	Judgement	—
SC/34/2024	SHO Amaravathi vs Songaramu	21 Oct 2024	Judgement	—
H.M.O.P/87/2024	Kunchala Raji alias Gunturu Yalamandhamma vs Kunchala Manikanta	21 Oct 2024	Order	—
H.M.O.P/88/2024	Gogula alias Yalagala Devayani vs Yelagala Yesu Babu	21 Oct 2024	Order	—
H.M.O.P/102/2022	Devalla Venkateswara Rao vs Devalla @ Battula Meri	18 Oct 2024	Order	—
H.M.O.P/122/2022	Dhikonda Narasimha Swamy vs Dhikonda Lakshmi Prasanna	18 Oct 2024	Order	—
OS/15/2024	Smt Chakravaram Sindhu vs Dasu Yedukondalu alias Yedukondal Rao	17 Oct 2024	Judgement	—
H.M.O.P/170/2023	Rajarapu PRasada Rao vs Rajarapu Tejaswini alias Rapolu Tejaswini	15 Oct 2024	Order	—
H.M.O.P/170/2023	Rajarapu PRasada Rao vs Rajarapu Tejaswini alias Rapolu Tejaswini	15 Oct 2024	Other	—
OS/317/2018	Golamari Harish Reddy vs Bonta Alivelu and two others	14 Oct 2024	Order	—
OS/317/2018	Golamari Harish Reddy vs Bonta Alivelu and two others	14 Oct 2024	Judgement	—
H.M.O.P/9/2024	Sattu Naga Raju vs Sattu alias Sattenapalli Bhargavi	14 Oct 2024	Order	—
H.M.O.P/9/2024	Sattu Naga Raju vs Sattu alias Sattenapalli Bhargavi	14 Oct 2024	Other	—
H.M.O.P/40/2024	S,t Krosuru Annapurna vs Dusari Adinarayana	14 Oct 2024	Order	—
H.M.O.P/100/2023	Gunde Saidulu vs Gunde alias Kalakonda Swarna Grace	14 Oct 2024	Order	—
H.M.O.P/58/2021	Gannamaneni Hanumantha Rao vs Gannamaneni Radhika	01 Oct 2024	Order	—
EP/12/2019	Vattikunta Naresh vs Kotha Balaiah	26 Sep 2024	Other	—
H.M.O.P/115/2023	Gali Srinivasa Goud vs Gali alias Peram Devika	26 Sep 2024	Order	—
IP/26/2023	Nunsavathu Chinna Naik vs Ramavathu Sambasiva Rao Naik62	25 Sep 2024	Order	—
H.M.O.P/73/2024	Vemula Kasi Viswanadham vs Vemula Veera Lakshmi	25 Sep 2024	Order	—
H.M.O.P/84/2024	Kancheti Bhargav vs Kancheti Navitha	25 Sep 2024	Order	—
OS/59/2015	PRATHIPATI RAMU vs RAVIPATI ARCHUTA SRINIVASA RAO	24 Sep 2024	Judgement	—
H.M.O.P/132/2023	Katakamsetty Srinivasa Rao vs Katamkamsetty alias Kasimsetty Sri Lakshmi	24 Sep 2024	Other	—
OS/2/2020	Alla Nageswara Rao vs Alla Venkata Rao and one another	23 Sep 2024	Order	—
OS/13/2020	Karumanchi Alivelu Mangamma vs Nalluri Ramesh	23 Sep 2024	Judgement	—
OS/13/2020	Karumanchi Alivelu Mangamma vs Nalluri Ramesh	23 Sep 2024	Order	—
H.M.O.P/37/2024	Yarabothu Yaswanth vs Yarabothu alias Penneda Devara Ramulamma	23 Sep 2024	Order	—
OS/222/2016	Tippireddy Sairam Reddy vs Masabattula Peada Nageswara Rao and two others	19 Sep 2024	Judgement	—
SC/314/2023	SI of police, Bellamkonda PS vs Kampa Vekateswarlu	19 Sep 2024	Judgement	—
H.M.O.P/45/2024	Jogiparthi Venkata Venkatesh vs Jogiparthi alias Usa Saritha	19 Sep 2024	Order	—
H.M.O.P/34/2024	Nettem Koteswara Rao vs Nettem Lakshmi Tirupatamma	18 Sep 2024	Order	—
EP/10/2021	M/S Pasumai fertilizers and festicides rep by its managing partner , Addepalli Bapeswara Rao vs M/S SVR pesticides rep by its prop. sale Mariyadas	14 Sep 2024	Other	—
IP/2/2021	Podile Pitchaiah vs Muppala Nithyananda Sharma	13 Sep 2024	Order	—
OS/5/2015	KONJETI VENUGOPAL vs VALABOJU NAGAMANI	10 Sep 2024	Judgement	—
OS/339/2016	Garige Venakteswara Rao vs Garige Shankar Rao and 3 others	10 Sep 2024	Judgement	—
H.M.O.P/27/2024	Somasani Naveen Reddy vs Gade Madhuri	10 Sep 2024	Order	—
OS/392/2015	Shaik Galib Saheb and 5 others vs Shaik Adam Shafi vuraf Mabu	09 Sep 2024	Judgement	—
OS/430/2015	Shaik Gali Saida vs Shaik Hussain and 6 others	09 Sep 2024	Judgement	—
AS/22/2016	Yellinedi Venkateswara Rao Vuraf B.D.R. and anothe vs Gandham Sree Ramulu and 3 others	05 Sep 2024	Other	—
AS/22/2016	Yellinedi Venkateswara Rao Vuraf B.D.R. and anothe vs Gandham Sree Ramulu and 3 others	05 Sep 2024	Judgement	—
H.M.O.P/60/2024	Mandalaneni Nagamani vs Mandalaneni Nageswara Rao	05 Sep 2024	Order	—
H.M.O.P/77/2024	Ilapuram alias Thorlikonda Anusha vs Ilapuram Bala Syda Rao	05 Sep 2024	Order	—
H.M.O.P/131/2022	Pallapu Ankamma vs Vspallapu Nagendram	05 Sep 2024	Order	—
OS/65/2015	MAILA NAGARAJU vs MORABOINA CHENCHAIAH	03 Sep 2024	Judgement	—
SC/1002/2022	THE SHO KROSURU PS vs CHILUVURI BHAGYA LAKSHMI	30 Aug 2024	Judgement	—
SC/1099/2022	THE SHO MUPPALLA PS vs CHALAMALA SREENIVASARAO	30 Aug 2024	Judgement	—
H.M.O.P/12/2024	Kukkala Pradeep Kumar vs Kukkala alias Gajja Triveni	30 Aug 2024	Order	—
H.M.O.P/21/2024	Bejjanki Gopi vs Bejjanki alias Munaga Sowjanya	30 Aug 2024	Other	—
H.M.O.P/26/2024	Gudikandula alias Korra Naga Mallika Bai vs Gudikandula Gopinath	30 Aug 2024	Order	—
H.M.O.P/59/2023	Arumalla@Duggempudi Sri Lakshmi Tirupatamma@Tirupatamma vs Arumalla Ravikanth Reddy	30 Aug 2024	Order	—
H.M.O.P/66/2024	Torlikonda alias Nizampatnam Komali vs Torlikonda Siva Nageswara Rao	30 Aug 2024	Order	—
H.M.O.P/71/2024	Paleti Naga Mani vs Paleti Nagendra Rao	30 Aug 2024	Order	—
H.M.O.P/21/2024	Bejjanki Gopi vs Bejjanki alias Munaga Sowjanya	29 Aug 2024	Order	—
H.M.O.P/53/2024	Koya alias Attipatla kalpana Devi and Koya Bala chandu vs NIL	29 Aug 2024	Order	—
H.M.O.P/62/2024	Nagarjunakonda Renuka Devi vs NIL	29 Aug 2024	Order	—
OS/55/2022	VANGETI REHANSH vs RAMA VENKATA SUBRAHMANYESWARA RAO	28 Aug 2024	Order	—
H.M.O.P/70/2021	Gangadharai Ramesh vs Gangadharai @ Challa Ramana Kumari	28 Aug 2024	Order	—
H.M.O.P/159/2021	Bathula Gopaiah vs Bathula Radha Kumari	28 Aug 2024	Order	—
H.M.O.P/159/2021	Bathula Gopaiah vs Bathula Radha Kumari	28 Aug 2024	Other	—
H.M.O.P/75/2024	Ganna Srinivas vs Ganna Bala Kumari	20 Aug 2024	Order	—
H.M.O.P/49/2024	Alla Poojithas alias Challa Poojitha vs Alla Anil Kumar Reddy	14 Aug 2024	Order	—
IP/9/2022	Mangisetty Venkataeswara Rao vs Vinnakota Prasad	13 Aug 2024	Order	—
H.M.O.P/69/2024	Vajrala alias Kommareddy Revathi vs Vajrala Venkateswara Reddy	13 Aug 2024	Order	—
EP/24/2023	Munnangi srinivasa reddy vs Yerram Hanimi Reddy	12 Aug 2024	Order	—
OS/370/2016	Nanduri @ Nandru Balaiah vs Nanduri @ Nandru Prakasa Rao and 7 others	12 Aug 2024	Judgement	—
EP/4/2023	ARETHOTI @ ARETHOTA JYOTHI @ ARETHOTA INDIRA JYOTHI vs GODDANTI LAKSHMANA RAO	09 Aug 2024	Order	—
EP/25/2022	Palukuri Subhashini vs Penumaka Subba Rao	09 Aug 2024	Other	—
OS/263/2016	Chinthapalli Shaik Moulali @ Shaik Moulali vs Shaik Mabu Subhani	09 Aug 2024	Judgement	—
EP/12/2021	Palapati Nandagopala Rao vs Pedakotla Jojappa	08 Aug 2024	Other	—
IP/28/2023	Goraka Siva Reddy vs Kota Seshagiri and four others	08 Aug 2024	Order	—
OS/168/2015	Valiveti Ramesh Kumar vs Bejavada John	05 Aug 2024	Judgement	—
OS/411/2015	Bejawada Prasad vs Valiveti Ramesh Kumar and 2 others	05 Aug 2024	Judgement	—
H.M.O.P/65/2024	Yamani alias Linga Kalpana vs Linga Babji	05 Aug 2024	Order	—
H.M.O.P/153/2023	Vasireddy Mallikarjuna Rao vs Vasireddy Priya Mahalakshmi	05 Aug 2024	Order	—
AS/8/2019	Chava Vijaya Lakshmi vs Kondapaneni Venkateswrlu	02 Aug 2024	Judgement	—
H.M.O.P/10/2024	Vazrala Hemanth Raghava Reddy vs Vazrala alias Kothapalli Jaya Sree	01 Aug 2024	Order	—
IP/5/2020	Orsu Babu Rao vs Rayidi Venkateswarlu and 29 others	31 Jul 2024	Order	—
IP/5/2020	Orsu Babu Rao vs Rayidi Venkateswarlu and 29 others	31 Jul 2024	Other	—
IP/19/2021	Thimmisetty Guravaiah @ Simmisetty Guravaiah vs Meda babu	31 Jul 2024	Order	—
IP/19/2021	Thimmisetty Guravaiah @ Simmisetty Guravaiah vs Meda babu	31 Jul 2024	Other	—
SC/76/2023	THE SHO BELLAMKONDA PS vs GOKANA SRINIVASA RAO	31 Jul 2024	Judgement	—
EP/7/2019	Paleti Veera Praad vs Yadlapalli Venkata Krishna	29 Jul 2024	Other	—
OS/51/2015	RAYAPATI BALA KRISHNA vs RAYAPATI BABU RAO	25 Jul 2024	Judgement	—
OS/148/2016	Ms. Alapati Enterprises, Guntur vs The state of A.P., rep. by its Dist. Collector and	25 Jul 2024	Order	—
OS/295/2018	Valluri Venkayamma vs Valluri Rama Rao and another	25 Jul 2024	Judgement	—
OS/18/2023	Nadendla Sowjanaya vs Mekala Venkateswarlu	24 Jul 2024	Judgement	—
OS/71/2022	Devarasetty Sreekanth vs Vajjala Hemalalitha	23 Jul 2024	Judgement	—
H.M.O.P/47/2024	Gunja alias Thammisetti Venkata Lakshmi vs Gunja Rajesh	23 Jul 2024	Order	—
H.M.O.P/172/2023	Chintagumpula Naresh vs Chintagumpula Leelavathi	22 Jul 2024	Other	—
OS/88/2017	Kolli Lakshmi Naveen vs Chittan narayanamma	19 Jul 2024	Judgement	—
EP/4/2021	Devarasetty Naga Raju vs Nissankararao Swa Ramakrishna	18 Jul 2024	Other	—
H.M.O.P/51/2024	Karamsetty alias Chanda Venkataq Siva Naga Sravani vs Chanda Naveen Kumar	18 Jul 2024	Order	—

Showing 100 of 192 orders — Log in to browse all pages.

Monthly Orders (Last 12 Months)

Oct 2024		29
Sep 2024		31
Aug 2024		34
Jul 2024		53
Jun 2024		22
May 2024		35
Apr 2024		6

Frequently Asked Questions

How many cases has Sri Ch. Venkata Naga Srinivasa Rao handled?

Sri Ch. Venkata Naga Srinivasa Rao has handled 210 court orders since 2024 at II Addl JCJ Court, Sattenapalli. The average disposal rate is 34 orders per month.

What types of cases does Sri Ch. Venkata Naga Srinivasa Rao hear?

Based on available records, Sri Ch. Venkata Naga Srinivasa Rao primarily handles Civil matters (Original Suits, Execution Petitions) and Criminal matters (Sessions Cases) at II Addl JCJ Court, Sattenapalli.

Where is Sri Ch. Venkata Naga Srinivasa Rao currently posted?

Sri Ch. Venkata Naga Srinivasa Rao is posted as Senior Civil Judge, Sattenapalli at II Addl JCJ Court, Sattenapalli, Guntur, Andhra Pradesh.

Are judgments by Sri Ch. Venkata Naga Srinivasa Rao available online?

Yes. 5 judgments by Sri Ch. Venkata Naga Srinivasa Rao are available on Legistro with full text, outcome, and sections cited.

How fast does Sri Ch. Venkata Naga Srinivasa Rao dispose cases?

Sri Ch. Venkata Naga Srinivasa Rao disposes approximately 34 cases per month, based on 210 orders handled over their tenure at II Addl JCJ Court, Sattenapalli.

Since when is Sri Ch. Venkata Naga Srinivasa Rao serving?

Sri Ch. Venkata Naga Srinivasa Rao has been serving at II Addl JCJ Court, Sattenapalli since 2024.

Case Types

H 46%

OS 27%

IP 8%

EP 8%

AS 7%

SC 5%

Posting History

Apr 2024 — Oct 2024

Senior Civil Judge, Sattenapalli · 210 orders

Other Judges at this Court

Vijay Kumar Reddy

Senior Civil Judge, Sattenapalli

416 orders

Sri J.Sujin Kumar

II Addl. Junior Civil Judge

457 orders

← View all judges at II Addl JCJ Court, Sattenapalli

Sri Ch. Venkata Naga Srinivasa Rao

O R D E R

“Whether the petitioner is entitled to divorce from the respondent by

dissolving her marriage with the respondent held on 06.11.2021?”

Appendix of Evidence

Witnesses examined

Documents Marked

C J (Sr. D)., SAP.,

// True Copy //

O R D E R

“Whether the petitioner is entitled to divorce from the respondent by

dissolving her marriage with the respondent held on 10.06.2003?”

Appendix of Evidence

Witnesses examined

Documents Marked

C J (Sr. D)., SAP.,

// True Copy //

O R D E R

“Whether the petitioner is entitled to divorce from the respondent by

dissolving her marriage with the respondent held on 23.05.1993?”

Appendix of Evidence

Witnesses examined

Documents Marked

// True Copy //

O R D E R

“Whether the petitioner is entitled to divorce from the respondent by

dissolving his marriage with the respondent held on 09.12.2021?”

Appendix of Evidence

Witnesses examined

Documents Marked

C J (Sr. D)., SAP.,

// True Copy //

-And-

O R D E R