Sri G.L.V.Prasad

1

CALENDAR AND JUDGMENT IN SESSIONS CASE NO.353/2018

(Crime No.61/2018 of Markapur Rural Police Station – PRC. No.38/2018 on the file of the Court of Additional Judicial Magistrate of I Class, Markapur)

ON THE FILE OF THE COURT OF ASSISTANT SESSIONS JUDGE ::: DARSI

(1) NAME OF THE COMPLAINANT : Inspector of Police, Markapur Circle (2) DESCRIPTION OF THE ACCUSED :

1. Nedurapalli Bala Raju, s/o Yacob, aged 41 years, Driver of Kamala College Bus No.AP26TT 0029(Died)

2. Penukonda Pawan Kumar, s/o Anantha Subrahmanya Kesava Rao, aged 31 years, Vysya, Owner of Bus No.AP26TT 0029, Car Street, Markapur town. … Accused (3)DATE OF : OccurrenceComplaintAppearanceCommencement ofClosure of trialSentence or trialorder 18.08.201818.08.201814.11.201917.07.202329.08.202331.08.2023 (4) Offence/Charge: under Section 304 Part II read with 109 of IPC & Section 5 read with 180 of MV Act. (5) Plea of accused (A2): Not guilty. (6) Finding of Court: Found not guilty (7) SENTENCE OF ORDER : The case against A1 was abated on 27.06.2023 as he died on 21.12.2022. A.2 is found not guilty of the offences under Section 304 Part II read with 109 of IPC and Section 5 read with Section 180 of Motor Vehicles Act and he is accordingly acquitted under Section 235(1) of Cr.P.C. The bail bond of A.2 shall be in force for a period of six months from this day as provided under Section 437-A of Cr.P.C (8) EXPLANATION FOR THE DELAY: The Court of the Additional Judicial Magistrate of I Class, Markapur committed this case as PRC No.38/2018 dated 27.11.2018 to the Hon'ble Court of Session, Sessions Division, Prakasam District, Ongole and the same was numbered as SC. No.353/2018 by the Hon'ble Court of Session, Ongole on 31.12.2018 and made over the same to the Court of Assistant Sessions Judge, Markapur for disposal according to law, but, subsequently as per the proceedings of the Hon’ble Principal District & Sessions Judge, Prakasam at Ongole, in Dis No.136 dated 09.01.2023, the case in SC No.353/2018 was withdrawn from the court of Assistant

Sessions Judge, Markapur and transferred to this court for disposal according to law. On

20.03.2023, this court received the case in SC No.353/2018. On 27.06.2023, the case against A1 was abated as he died on 21.12.2022. On 10.07.2023, A2 was examined under Section 228 of Cr.P.C and charges under Section 304 Part II, read with 109 of IPC and Section 5 read with 180 of MV Act were framed against A2, read over and explained to him in Telugu, for which he pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. During trial, on behalf of prosecution, PWs.1 to 12 were examined and Exs.P1 to P22 were marked. On 29.08.2023 A2 was examined under Section 313 Cr.P.C., for which he denied the incriminating material appearing against him and reported no defence evidence on his behalf and on the same day arguments of both sides were heard and the case stands posted to 31.08.2023 for judgment. On 31.08.2023 judgment pronounced (vide separate) in open Court. Hence, the delay.

Sd/- G. L.V. Prasad,

ASSISTANT SESSIONS JUDGE,

DARSI. Copy submitted to:

1. The Hon’ble District & Sessions Judge, Ongole

2. The Director of Prosecutions, Door No.24-19-15/A, Durgapuram,Vijayawada Copy to:

1. The Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Markapur.

2. The Superintendent of Police, Prakasam District, Ongole.

3. The Additional Public Prosecutor, Darsi.

2S.C._353_2018

IN THE COURT OF THE ASSISTANT SESSIONS JUDGE : DARSI

Present: Sri G. L. V. Prasad, Assistant Sessions Judge

Thursday, the Thirty First day of August, 2023

Sessions Case No.353 of 2018

(PRC No.38/2018 on the file of Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Markapur)

Between:

State: Inspector of Police, Markapur Circle Crime No.61 of 2018 of Markapur Rural Police Station …Complainant

and

1. Nedurapalli Bala Raju, s/o Yacob, aged 41 years, Driver of Kamala College Bus No.AP26TT 0029(Died)

2. Penukonda Pawan Kumar, s/o Anantha Subrahmanya Kesava Rao, aged 31 years, Vysya, Owner of Bus No.AP26TT 0029, Car Street, Markapur town. … Accused

This case is coming on before me for final hearing on 29.08.2023 in the presence of Sri M. Adi Narayana, Additional Public Prosecutor, for complainant and of Sri T.K. Appa Rao and Sri V. Srinivasa Rao, advocates for A2; and the case against A1 was abated on 27.06.2023 as he died on 21.12.2022; and upon perusing the material on record and having stood over for consideration till this day, this Court delivered the following____

JUDGMENT

The Inspector of Police, Markapur Circle filed this case in Crime No.61 of 2018 of

Markapur Rural Police Station alleging that A1 and A2 have committed the offences punishable under Section 304 Part II of the Indian Penal Code 1860 and Sections 134(a) and (b) read with Section 187, Section 3 read with Section 181 and Section 5 read with Section 180 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for short, ‘the MV Act’).

2. The case of the prosecution, in brief, is as follows___

(a). One Mendem Bodaiah (hereinafter called as the deceased) is the husband of

Pw1 and they had four daughters and a son and they performed all their marriages.

The younger daughter of the deceased and Pw1 i.e., Pw4 came to her parents house 3S.C._353_2018 situated in Boopathipalli village from Venkatapuram village on her personal work and is residing with the deceased temporarily. On 18.08.2018, during noon time, the deceased and Pw.4 went to Cumbhum to attend their personal work and on the same day, during evening, at about 06.00pm, the deceased and Pw.4 returned to their village

Boopathipalli village and Pw.4 went to the house, whereas, the deceased stayed in the bus stand and was chitchatting with Pws.5 to 9. On the same night, at about 07.30pm, when the deceased was returning to his house from bus stand center by walk, near the bus stand center, A1, being the driver of Kamala College Bus bearing No.AP26TT 0029 proceeding from Mittameedapalli to Markapur, drove the bus in a rash and negligent manner with high speed and without blowing horn dashed the deceased on his left side. As a result of which, the deceased fell down and the tyres of the said Kamala

College bus ran over on the deceased from right side abdomen, waist and also run over the knees. Due to the said accident, the deceased was crushed and blood was oozed out from him and died on the spot. Immediately, Pws.5 to 9 having witnessed the said accident raised cries and on hearing their cries, A1 ran away from the spot by stopping the bus. Thereupon, Pws.5 to 9 informed the incident to Pws.1 to 4, who visited the accident spot and found the dead body of the deceased in a pool of blood. Later Pw.1 lodged a report to Markapur Rural police station.

(b). Based on the report of Pw.1, Mr. S. Mallikarjuna Rao-SI of police (Lw18) registered the same as a case in Crime No.61/2018, under Section 304 part-II of IPC and sent copies of FIRs to all concerned. On receipt of copy of FIR, Pw.11, who is the

In-charge Inspector of police of Markapur Circle, tookup investigation. During investigation, Pw.11 visited the scene of offence, observed the scene of offence in the presence of Pw.10 and Venna Venkata Kasi Reddy (Lw11), prepared scene of offence observation report in the presence of said mediators, drew rough sketch of the scene of offence and got photographed the scene of offence. Thereafter, Pw.11 visited

Government Area Hospital, Markapur got conducted inquest over the dead body of the 4S.C._353_2018 deceased in the presence of Pw.10, Venna Venkata Kasi Reddy and Golamari Nasara

Reddy (Lw11 and 13) and in the presence of the family members of the deceased under the cover of an inquest report and sent the dead body of the deceased for postmortem examination. At the time of inquest, Pw.11 examined Pws.1 to 6 and recorded their statements. On the same day, Pw.11 again visited scene of offence, examined Pws.7 to 9 and recorded their statements through Ms. D. Ramizan Bi-WPC 532 (Lw14).

Based on the strength of the statements of the witnesses recorded by him, Pw.11 added Section 134 (a) & (b) read with 187 of Motor Vehicles Act. On 21.08.2018,

Pw.12, who is the Inspector of Markapur Circle took up further investigation, visited

Kamala Education Society College, Markapur and seized the crime bus bearing

No.AP26TT 0029 in the presence of Pw.10 and Venna Venkata Kasi Reddy (Lw11) under the cover of a mediators report and thereafter sent requisition to Mr. Chandra

Ram Babu- MV Inspector (Lw17) to inspect the crime bus.

(c). During further investigation, on 02.09.2018, at about 10.30am, on receipt of credible information about the movements of A1, Pw.12 secured Pw.10 and Venna

Venkata Kasi Reddy (Lw11) and in their presence recorded confession statement of A1 and in-pursuance of the confession statement of A1, seized the original Driving License of A1 from the possession of A1 under the cover of a mediators report in the presence of the said mediators and sent A1 for judicial remand. As the driver of crime bus i.e.,A1 is not having any valid driving license and as A2 is the owner of the crime bus allowed

A1 to drive the bus without valid driving license added A2 since Section 5 read with 180 of Motor Vehicles Act is applicable to A2. On 15.09.2018, Pw.12 issued notice under

Section 41A of Cr.P.C. to A2 and received explanation from him. Dr. K.S. Dayanidhi (Lw16) conducted autopsy over the dead body of the deceased and issued postmortem certificate opining that the deceased might have died due to Sub dural Hematoma and multiple fractures. Mr. Chandra Ram Babu-MV Inspector (Lw17) inspected crime bus bearing No.AP26TT 0029 and issued MVI report opining that the accident was not due 5S.C._353_2018 to any mechanical defects of the vehicle involved in the accident. After completion of investigation, Pw.12 laid charge sheet against A1 and A2.

3.On 12.10.2018, learned Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Markapur took cognizance of the offences under Section 304 Part II of IPC and Sections 134(a) and (b) read with 187 of MV Act and Section 3 read with 181 of MV Act against A.1 and the offence under Section 5 read with 180 MV Act against A.2; and registered the same as PRC No.38 of 2018. On appearance of A1 and A2 before the Court of Additional

Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Markapur, copies of case papers as required under

Section 207 of Cr.P.C were furnished to A1 and A2. As the offence under Section 304

Part II of IPC is exclusively triable by a Court of Session, on 27.11.2018 learned

Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Markapur committed the case in PRC

No.38 of 2018 to the Hon’ble Court of Session, Prakasam Division, Ongole under

Section 209 of Cr.P.C. On 31.12.2018,the Hon’ble Sessions Judge, Ongole was pleased to register PRC No.38 of 2018 as SC No.353 of 2018 and made over the same to the Court of Assistant Sessions Judge, Markapur for disposal according to law. But, subsequently, based on the letter dated 23.12.2022 of the learned Assistant Sessions

Judge, Markapur, the Hon’ble District & Sessions Judge, Ongole, vide proceedings in

Dis No.136 dated 09.01.2023 withdrawn the case from the court of Assistant Sessions

Judge, Markapur and transferred to this court for disposal according to law.

4.On 27.06.2023, SI of police, Markapur Rural police station filed a Memo along with attested copy of death certificate of A1 stating that A.1 died on 21.12.2022, and as such, the case against A.1 was abated on the same day.

5.On appearance of A.2 before this Court, A.2 was examined under Section 228 of

Cr.P.C for which he denied the offences. Charges under Section 304 Part II read with 109 of IPC and Section 5 read with Section 180 of MV Act are framed against A.2, read 6S.C._353_2018 over and explained to him in Telugu, for which he pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.

6.In order to establish its case, prosecution has examined PWs.1 to 12 and got marked exhibits Exs.P1 to P22. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor has given up the evidence of Gopaluni Naga Sundara Narahari, Venna Venkata Kasi Reddy, Golamari

Nasara Reddy, Ms. D. Ramizan Bi-WPC 532, Mr K. V. Raghu-PC 3824, Dr. K.S.

Dayanidhi, Mr. Chandra Ram Babu-MV Inspector and Mr S. Mallikarjuna Rao-SI of police (Lws.10, 11 and 13 to 18).

7.After closure of prosecution evidence, A.2 was examined under Section 313 of

Cr.P.C with regard to incriminating material appearing in the evidence of prosecution witnesses, for which he denied. A.2 stated that he has not defence.

8.Heard learned Additional Public Prosecutor, for the complainant, learned counsel for A.2 and perused the record.

9.Now the point that arises for determination is____

Whether prosecution has brought home the guilt of A.2 of the offences under Section 304 Part II read with 109 of IPC and Section 5 read with Section 180 of Motor Vehicles Act beyond all reasonable doubt?

10.Point: According to prosecution, on 18.08.2018 at about 07.30pm, while one

Mendem Bodaiah (the deceased), who is the husband of Pw1, was returning from bus stand center in Boopathipalli village to his house by walk and near bus stand center, A1 being the driver of Kamala College Bus bearing No.AP26TT 0029 proceeding from

Mittameedapalli to Markapur, drove the bus in a rash and negligent manner and without blowing horn, with high speed, dashed the deceased, and as a result of which, the deceased died on the spot, and the said accident was witnessed by Pws.5 to 9, who informed the same to the family members of the deceased i.e., Pws.1 to 4; and that 7S.C._353_2018 based on Ex.P1 report given by Pw1, the law with regard to occurrence of accident was set into motion. It is also according to prosecution that at the time of the accident, A1 was the driver of the crime bus and A2 is the owner of the crime bus allowed A1 to drive the crime bus knowing fully well that A1 was not having valid driving license to drive the crime bus at the time of the accident.

11.In order to establish its case, as already noted, on behalf of prosecution, PWs.1 to 12 were examined and Exs.P1 to P22 were marked. Pw.1, who is the wife of the deceased, is the author of Ex.P1 report. Pw.2 is the younger brother of the deceased.

Pws.3 and 4 are the son and daughter respectively of the deceased. Pws.5 to 9 are the eye-witnesses to the accident. Pw.10 is one of the mediators with regard to scene of offence observation report, inquest report, seizure report relating to crime bus, confession mediator report relating to A1. Pws.11 and 12 are the investigating officers.

12.As already noted, according to prosecution, the law with regard to the occurrence of accident was set into motion based on Ex.P1 report given by PW.1 to the police. In her evidence, PW.1 deposed that about four years back, on one day, at about 07.30pm, the deceased met with an accident caused by the dirver of a bus and died on the spot; and that on coming to know the said accident, she rushed to the accident spot and lodged Ex.P1 report to police. She further deposed that she does not know the contents of Ex.P1 report and the contents of Ex.P1 were prepared by police and that she was not examined by the police. Similarly, Pws.2 to 4, who are the family members of the deceased, though deposed about the occurrence of accident, death of the deceased in the said accident, they deposed that they came to know that the driver of a lorry caused the said accident and that they were not examined by the police. Coming to the evidence of eye-witnesses to the accident, who are examined as Pws.5 to 9, they almost deposed in similar lines that about five years back, on one day, at about 07.00pm, the deceased met with an accident at bus stand center of Boopathipalli village 8S.C._353_2018 caused by the driver of lorry and that they have not witnessed the said accident and that they were not examined by the police. Since PWs.1 to 9 did not support the case of prosecution, learned Additional Public Prosecutor was permitted to cross-examine them and during cross-examination PWs 1 to 9 having stated before police denied the contents of their earlier statements as required under Section 161 of Cr.P.C and the same were marked as Exs.P2 to P10 respectively. As the main witnesses i.e., PWs.1 to 4, who are family members of the deceased, Pws.5 to 9, who are eyewitnesses to the accident, did not support the case of prosecution, the remaining evidence available on record is that of PWs. 10 to 12. Therefore, now it has to be seen the said evidence.

13.Coming to the evidence of PW.10, who is one of the mediators with regard to the scene of the observation report, inquest report, seizure report relating to crime bus and confession mediators report relating to A1, deposed that in his presence and in the presence of other mediators, Markapur Rural police observed the scene of offence under the cover of Ex.P11 scene of observation report, got conducted inquest over the dead body of deceased under the cover of Ex.P12 inquest report. He also deposed that himself and other inquestdars opined that the deceased sustained severe injuries in the accident caused by the driver of crime bus and succumbed to the injuries. He also deposed about seizure of Kamala School bus, Markapur covered under Ex.P13 mediators report and also about arresting of A1, recording of confession statement of

A1 on 02.09.2018 covered under Ex.P14 mediators report etc., facts. In their evidence,

Pws.11 and 12 deposed about the investigation done by them and so also filing of charge sheet against A1 and A2 etc., facts and through Pw.11 Ex.P15 FIR in Crime

No.61/2018, Ex.P16 rough sketch of the scene of offence and Ex.P17 positive photographs with CD relating to scene of offence and through Pw.12 Ex.P18 postmortem certificate of the deceased, Ex.P19 MVI report, Ex.P20 Light Motor Vehicle 9S.C._353_2018

Driving License of A1, Ex.P21 Certificate of Registration of Crime bus and Ex.P22

Vehicle Permit relating to Crime bus were marked.

14.As noted above, not only the family members of the deceased i.e., Pws.1 to 4, but also the eye-witnesses i.e., Pws.5 to 9 did not support the case of the prosecution and turned hostile. No doubt, Pw.10, who is one of the mediators covered under

Exs.P11 to P14, Pws.11 and 12, who are the investigating officers supported the case of the prosecution. But, in the absence of placing on record any direct evidence to show that A1 was the driver of the crime bus at the relevant point of time of the accident and that A2 as owner of the crime bus allowed A1 knowing fully well that A1 was not having any valid driving license to drive the crime bus, it cannot be said that A2 is guilty of the offences with which he is charged. In that view of the matter, this Court is of the view that prosecution has miserably failed to bring home the guilt of A2 of the offences with which he is charged and he is accordingly entitled to benefit of doubt.

15.In the result, A.2 is found not guilty of the offences under Section 304 Part II read with 109 of IPC and Section 5 read with Section 180 of Motor Vehicles Act and he is accordingly acquitted under Section 235(1) of Cr.P.C. The bail bond of A.2 shall be in force for a period of six months from this day as provided under Section 437-A of

Cr.P.C. The unmarked bus bearing No.AP26TT 0029, which was given interim custody to A2 as per orders on Crl.M.P No.8962/2018 dated 10.10.2018, shall be retained with him on the same terms and conditions imposed earlier, till the expiry of the appeal time.

Typed to my dictation by the Stenographer Grade-III, corrected and pronounced by me in the open Court on this the 31st day of August, 2023.

Sd/- G.L.V. Prasad,

ASSISTANT SESSIONS JUDGE,

DARSI.

10S.C._353_2018

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

WITNESSES EXAMINED

For Prosecution: For Defence: PW.1: Smt. Mendem Meramma.None PW.2: Mendem Pitchaiah. PW.3: Mendem Deva Sahayam. PW.4: Smt Pustela Sabitha. PW.5: Manamala Venkata Ramana. PW.6: Mendem Chandra Babu PW.7: Dudekula Kharim PW.8: Munnangi Vijay Kumar. PW.9: Bochu Kasi Reddy PW.10: Dudekula Kasim Saheb. PW.11: Mr. D. Mallikarjuna Rao- CI of Police. PW.12: Mr. M. Bheema Naik-CI of Police.

DOCUMENTS MARKED

For Prosecution: Ex.P1: 18.08.2018: Report given by Pw1 to police Ex.P2: 19.08.2018: Statement of PW.1 under Section 161 of Cr.P.C. Ex.P3: 19.08.2018: Statement of PW.2 under Section 161 of Cr.P.C. Ex.P4: 19.08.2018: Statement of PW.3 under Section 161 of Cr.P.C. Ex.P5: 19.08.2018: Statement of PW.4 under Section 161 of Cr.P.C. Ex.P6: 19.08.2018: Statement of PW.5 under Section 161 of Cr.P.C. Ex.P7: 19.08.2018: Statement of PW.6 under Section 161 of Cr.P.C. Ex.P8: 19.08.2018: Statement of PW.7 under Section 161 of Cr.P.C. Ex.P9: 19.08.2018: Statement of PW.8 under Section 161 of Cr.P.C. Ex.P10: 19.08.2018: Statement of PW.9 under Section 161 of Cr.P.C. Ex.P11: 19.08.2018: Scene of offence observation report at 08.00 AM. Ex.P12: 19.08.2018: Inquest report at 11.00 AM. Ex.P13: 21.08.2018: Mediators report at 11.00 AM. Ex.P14: 02.09.2018: Mediators report at 11.00 Am. Ex.P15: 18.08.2018: Printed FIR in Crime No.61/2018 Ex.P16: 18.08.2018: Rough sketch of scene of offence Ex.P17: ---- : Positive photographs with CD. Ex.P18:25.08.2018: Postmortem certificate of the deceased. Ex.P19:01.09.2018: MVI report. Ex.P20: – : Light Motor Vehicle Driving license of A1. Ex.P21:11.07.2015: Certificate of Registration of Crime bus. Ex.P22:12.11.2015: Vehicle Permit relating to Crime bus issued by RTA, Ongole. For Defence: Nil.

MATERIAL OBJECTS MARKED

-NIL- Ild/- GLV

ASJ, DARSI.

__________

IN THE COURT OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE: DARSI

Present: Sri G. L. V. Prasad

Senior Civil Judge

Thursday, the Tenth day of August, 2023

Original Suit No.18 of 2023

Between

Rami Reddy Sathish Reddy, s/o Yogi Reddy, aged 54 years, Hindu, Business, r/o Flat No. 41, Sri Krishna Devaraya Nagar, Yallareddyguda, Hyderabad, Telangana State. … Plaintiff

and

1. Kadam Srinivasulu, s/o late Subbaiah, aged 58 years, Hindu, Cultivation, r/o Donakonda village, Donakonda Mandal, Prakasam District.

2. Syed Gousia, s/o Basha, aged 55 Years, Muslim, Housewife, r/o Donakonda Village, Donakonda Mandal, Prakasam District.

3. Shaik Shehanaz, w/o Iqbal, aged 50 years, Muslim, Housewife, r/o Donakonda village, Donakonda Mandal, Prakasam District.

4. Mekala Yohan s/o Rajaiah, aged 60 years, Hindu, Cultivation, r/o Donakonda Village, Donakonda Mandal, Prakasam District.

5. Mekala Naga Raju, s/o Yohan, aged 30 years, Hindu, Cultivation, r/o Cultivation, r/o Donakonda village, Donakonda Mandal, Prakasam District.

6. Punnamma, s/o Peda Narasaiah, aged 74 years, Hindu, Housewife, Donakonda Village, Donakonda Mandal, Prakasam District.

7. Kame Narasaiah, s/o Guraiah, aged 77 years, Hindu, Donakonda Village, Donakonda Mandal, Prakasam District.

8. Pathi Venkateswarlu, s/o Ananthaiah, aged 38 years, Hindu, Cultivation, r/o Donakonda Village, Donakonda Mandal, Prakasam District.

9. Syed Altaf, s/o Umar, aged 74 years, Muslim, r/o Donakonda village, Donakonda Mandal, Prakasam District. 10.Mandala Don Mery, w/o Antony Peter, aged 60 years, Christian, Housewife, r/o Donakonda Village, Donakonda Mandal, Prakasam District. 11.Mandala Antony Peter, s/o Antony aged 70 years, Christian, r/o Donakonda village, Donakonda Mandal, Prakasam District. 12.Chennamsetty Venkata Rao, s/o Veera Brahmam, aged 36 years, Hindu, Cultivation, r/o Donakonda Village, Donakonda Mandal, Prakasam District.

... Defendants

This suit is filed for permanent injunction restraining the defendants, their men, assignees and representatives from ever interfering with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the suit schedule property by the plaintiff, his men, representatives and assignees and for costs.

This suit is coming on before me for final hearing on this day, in the presence of Sri M. Sai Kumar, advocate for plaintiff; and upon perusing the material on record, and having stood over for consideration till this day, the Court delivered the following___

JUDGMENT

Process memo not represented. None appears on behalf of plaintiff and there is no representation on behalf of plaintiff. Plaintiff called absent.

Hence, the suit is dismissed for default.

Pronounced by me in open court this the 10th day of August, 2023

SD/- GLV Prasad

SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE,

DARSI.

Appendix of evidence

- No oral or documentary evidence is adduced on either side ILd/- GLV

S.C.J.,DARSI

IN THE COURT OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE: DARSI

Present: Sri G. L. V. Prasad

Senior Civil Judge

Thursday, the Tenth day of August, 2023

Original Suit No.18 of 2023

Between

Rami Reddy Sathish Reddy, s/o Yogi Reddy, aged 54 years, Hindu, Business, r/o Flat No. 41, Sri Krishna Devaraya Nagar, Yallareddyguda, Hyderabad, Telangana State. … Plaintiff

and

1. Kadam Srinivasulu, s/o late Subbaiah, aged 58 years, Hindu, Cultivation, r/o Donakonda village, Donakonda Mandal, Prakasam District.

2. Syed Gousia, s/o Basha, aged 55 Years, Muslim, Housewife, r/o Donakonda Village, Donakonda Mandal, Prakasam District.

3. Shaik Shehanaz, w/o Iqbal, aged 50 years, Muslim, Housewife, r/o Donakonda village, Donakonda Mandal, Prakasam District.

4. Mekala Yohan s/o Rajaiah, aged 60 years, Hindu, Cultivation, r/o Donakonda Village, Donakonda Mandal, Prakasam District.

5. Mekala Naga Raju, s/o Yohan, aged 30 years, Hindu, Cultivation, r/o Cultivation, r/o Donakonda village, Donakonda Mandal, Prakasam District.

6. Punnamma, s/o Peda Narasaiah, aged 74 years, Hindu, Housewife, Donakonda Village, Donakonda Mandal, Prakasam District.

7. Kame Narasaiah, s/o Guraiah, aged 77 years, Hindu, Donakonda Village, Donakonda Mandal, Prakasam District.

8. Pathi Venkateswarlu, s/o Ananthaiah, aged 38 years, Hindu, Cultivation, r/o Donakonda Village, Donakonda Mandal, Prakasam District.

9. Syed Altaf, s/o Umar, aged 74 years, Muslim, r/o Donakonda village, Donakonda Mandal, Prakasam District. 10.Mandala Don Mery, w/o Antony Peter, aged 60 years, Christian, Housewife, r/o Donakonda Village, Donakonda Mandal, Prakasam District. 11.Mandala Antony Peter, s/o Antony aged 70 years, Christian, r/o Donakonda village, Donakonda Mandal, Prakasam District. 12.Chennamsetty Venkata Rao, s/o Veera Brahmam, aged 36 years, Hindu, Cultivation, r/o Donakonda Village, Donakonda Mandal, Prakasam District.

... Defendants

This suit is filed for permanent injunction restraining the defendants, their men, assignees and representatives from ever interfering with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the suit schedule property by the plaintiff, his men, representatives and assignees and for costs.

Plaint presented on:11.07.2023 Plaint registered on:11.07.2023

Court Fee: For the purpose of Court fee and jurisdiction the relief of permanent injunction is notionally valued at Rs.20,10,000/- on which a Court fee of Rs.22,526/- is paid u/s 26(c) of A.P.CF and SV Act. . Cause of action:The cause of action for the suit arose on 06.02.2015 when the plaintiff purchased the plaint schedule property and since then when plaintiff has been in peaceful, continuous and exclusive possession and enjoyment of the plaint schedule property and subsequently about one month back when the defendants tried to trespass into the plaint schedule property and now the defendants are proclaiming here and there, that they are gathering mass to trespass into the plaint schedule property and the same having arisen at Badapuram Village, Donakonda Mandal where the suit schedule property is situating within the jurisdiction of this Court.

This suit is coming on before me for final hearing on this day, in the presence of Sri M. Sai Kumar, advocate for plaintiff; and upon perusing the material on record, and having stood over for consideration till this day, this Court doth order and decree__ i. that the suit be and is hereby dismissed for default; and ii. that there be no order as to costs.

PLAINT SCHEDULE

District: Prakasam-Ongole Registration District-Darsi Sub-District-Mandal: Donakonda-Donakonda Grama Panchayath Area-Badapuram Village-survey No.209/1-an extent of 4840 sq. yards or 4046.24 sq. meters of vacant site out of the total extent of Ac.6.22 cents- bounded by: East: Road, south: ABFMS Land, West : Remanding land of vendor of the plaintiff, North: Road.

Given under my hand and the seal of this court, this the 10th day of August, 2023.

SD/- GLV Prasad

SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE,

DARSI.

COSTS OF SUIT

CM & FC not filed on either side

ILd/- GLV

SCJ, DARSI.

O.S.No._130_2017

IN THE COURT OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE :: DARSI

Present: Sri G. L. V. Prasad

Senior Civil Judge

Tuesday, the Twenty Ninth day of August, 2023

O.S.No. 130 of 2017

Between: Mangamuri Anjamma, w/o late Thirupathaiah, aged 45 years, Hindu,cultivation, r/o Door No.5-136 of Pedakancherla village, Vinukonda Mandal, Guntur District. … Plaintiff And.,

1. Maguluri Mangathayaramma, w/o later Ramaiah, aged 66 years, Hindu, household, r/o Door No.01-08 of Bheemavaram village, Mundlamur Mandal, Prakasam District.

2. Bikki Anuradha, w/o Kotaiah, aged 40 years, Hindu, cultivation, Door No.03-50 of Pittambanda village, Enugupalem post, Vinukonda Mandal, Guntur District.

3. Gurijala Venkateswarlu, s/o Venkata Subbaiah, aged 40 years, Hindu, business, r/o Oplot No.208, Om Sri Siva Sai Towers, Markapur road,Vinukonda Town, Guntur District.

4. Gurijala Venkata Suresh Babu, s/o Venkateswarlu, aged 21 years, Hindu, student, r/o Plot No.208,Om Sri Siva Sai Towers, Markapur road,Vinukonda Town, Guntur District.

5. Gurijala Mallikarjun, s/o Venkateswarlu, aged 19 years, Hindu, student,r/o Plot No.208,Om Sri Siva Sai Towers, Markapur road,Vinukonda Town, Guntur District. … Defendants

This is a suit filed for partition of plaint schedule properties into (9) equal shares for allotment and separate possession of (4) such shares to plaintiff and for mesne profits from the date of suit till the date of delivery of possession of 4/9th share to plaintiff, and for costs.

This suit coming on this day for final hearing before me in the presence of Sri A. Ajay Babu and Sri V. Durga Rao, advocates for plaintiff; and ofSri G.T. Shiva Sharma, advocate for defendant Nos.1 and 2; and of Sri Y.Srinivasa Rao, advocate for defendant Nos.3 to 5; and upon perusing the material on record; and having stood over for consideration till this day, the Court delivered the following___

JUDGMENT

As per the directions in the Judgment and preliminary decree dated 21.10.2022, passed in the suit, plaintiff has taken steps by way of filing petition under Order 20 rule 18 of CPC and the same was numbered as IA No.91 of 2023, in which respondent Nos.1 to 5 remained exparte. Since the plaintiff has taken steps under Order 20 rule 18 of CPC, and since both the suit and final decree petition in IA No.91 of 2023 are shown as pending cases in e-courts, the suit is closed for the present. Office is directed to put up the suit docket while passing final orders in IA No.91 of 2023.

Accordingly, the suit is closed.

Pronounced by me in open court, this the 29th day of August, 2023.

Sd/- GLV Prasad

SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE,

DARSI.

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

NIL

ILD/- GLV

SCJ, DARSI.

O.S.No._130_2017 O.S.No._80_2016

IN THE COURT OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE :: DARSI

Present: Sri G. L. V. Prasad

Senior Civil Judge

Thursday, the Seventh day of April, 2022

O.S.No. 80 of 2016

Between: Mule Narsamma w/o Krishna Reddy, aged 45 years, Hindu, Landholder, r/o.Kurichedu village and Mandal. … Plaintiff And.,

1. Nusum Malla Reddy, s/o. Nagi Reddy, aged 70 years, Hindu, landholder, near Panchayat Office, Kurichedu village & Mandal.

2. Nusum Nagi Reddy, s/o. Malla Reddy, aged 40 years, Hindu, landholder, near Panchayat Office, Kurichedu village & Mandal.

3. Nusum Gurava Reddy, s/o. Malla Reddy, aged 39 years, Hindu, landholder, near Panchayat Office, Kurichedu village & Mandal.

4. Nusum Venkateswarlu Reddy, s/o. Malla Reddy, aged 37 years, Hindu, landholder, near Panchayat Office, Kurichedu village & Mandal.

5. Nusum Venkata Reddy, s/o. Malla Reddy, aged 35 years, Hindu, landholder, near Panchayat Office, Kurichedu village & Mandal.

6. Nusum Sankara Reddy, s/o. Malla Reddy, aged 36 years, Hindu, landholder, near Panchayat Office, Kurichedu village & Mandal. … Defendants This is a suit for partition of plaint schedule properties be divided into eight equal shares and allot one such contiguous shares to the plaintiff according to the fertility and utility of the soil and directing the defendants to deliver possession of such 1/8th share to plaintiff within the time fixed by the Court and for costs.

Plaint presented on:23.08.2016 Plaint registered on:23.08.2016

Court Fee: For the purpose of court fee and jurisdiction, the relief of partition and separate possession, is valued as follows; the market value A and B schedule properties is Rs.59,46,120/-, value of plaintiff’s 1/8th share is Rs.7,43,265/-, 3/4th value of the same is Rs.5,57,449/-, on which a court fee of Rs.200/- is paid under Sec.34(2) of APCF and SV Act, as the plaintiff and defendants are in joint and constructive possession of the suit schedule properties. Jurisdiction value is Rs.5,57,449/-. Cause of action:The cause of action for the suit arose when the plaint schedule properties are the ancestral properties of D1 and plaintiff, D7 are his daughters and D2 to D6 are his sons and are each entitled to an undivided 1/8th share in the plaint schedule properties and they are in joint and constructive possession and enjoyment of the same and the plaintiff is entitled to undivided 1/8th share, since a month when plaintiff has been demanding D1 to D6 to cooperate for partition for which they did not come forward, since a week when D1 is trying to execute a sham and nominal document in favour of 3rd parties at Kurichedu village and mandal, where the plaint schedule properties are situated within the jurisdiction of this Court.

This suit coming on this day for final hearing before me in the presence of Sri G.T.Shiva Sharma, advocate for plaintiff and of Sri A.V.S. Jagadeesh, advocate for defendant Nos.1 to 6; and that none appears on behalf of plaintiff costs of Rs.500/- not paid and having stood over for consideration till this day this Court doth order and decree__

O.S.No._80_2016 i. that the suit be and is hereby dismissed for default; and ii. that there be no order as to costs

Plaint schedule is hereto attached

Given under my hand and the seal of this court, this the 7th day of April, 2022.

SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE,

DARSI.

COSTS OF SUIT

CM & FC not filed on either side

SCJ, DARSI.

O.S.No._1_2016

IN THE COURT OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE :: DARSI

Present: Sri G. L. V. Prasad

Senior Civil Judge

Tuesday, the Twenty Ninth day of August, 2023

O.S.No. 1 of 2016

Between: Badam Rama Krishna Reddy, s/o Bikshalu Reddy @ Bichala Reddy @ Muthyala Reddy, aged 30 years, Hindu, employee, r/o Venkata Reddypalem, Thallur village and Mandal, Prakasam District. … Plaintiff And.,

1. Badam Bikshalu Reddy @ Bichalu Reddy @ Muthyala Reddy, s/o Pitchi Reddy @ Peda Pitchi Reddy, aged 59 years, Hindu, cultivation, r/o Door No.2-34, Main road, Venkata Reddypalem, Thallur village and mandal, Prakasam District.

2. Badam Raja Sekhar Reddy, s/o Bikshalu Reddy @ Bichala Reddy, @ Muthayala Reddy, aged 28 years, Hindu, cultivation, r/o Venkata Reddypalem, Thallur village and mandal, Prakasam District.

3. Badam Yaswanth Sainath Reddy, s/o Raja Sekhar Reddy, aged 5 years, being minor represented by his guardian mother Badam Malleswari, w/o Raja Sekhar Reddy, r/o Venkata Reddypalem, Thallur village and mandal, Prakasam District. Defendant No.3 is added as per the orders on IA No.573 of 2019,

dated 15.11.2019.

… Defendants

This is a suit filed for partition of plaint schedule properties into three equal shares for allotment and separate possession of one such share to plaintiff and for costs.

This suit coming on this day for final hearing before me in the presence of Sri M. Ramanjaneyulu, advocate for plaintiff; and of Sri V. Ramana Reddy, advocate for defendant Nos.1 to 3,and upon perusing the material on record; and having stood over for consideration till this day, the Court delivered the following___

JUDGMENT

As per the directions in the Judgment and preliminary decree dated 04.01.2023, passed in the suit, plaintiff has taken steps by way of filing petition under Order 20 rule 18 of CPC and the same was numbered as IA No.285 of 2023, in which respondent Nos.1 to 3 put in their appearance and the same stands posted for their counter. Since the plaintiff has taken steps under Order 20 rule 18 of CPC, and since both the suit and final decree petition in IA No.285 of 2023 are shown as pending cases in e-courts, the suit is closed for the present. Office is directed to put up the suit docket while passing final orders in IA No.285 of 2023.

Accordingly, the suit is closed.

Pronounced by me in open court, this the 29th day of August, 2023.

Sd/- GLV Prasad

SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE,

DARSI.

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

NIL

ILD/- GLV

SCJ, DARSI.

O.S.No._115_2016

IN THE COURT OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE :: DARSI

Present: Sri G. L. V. Prasad

Senior Civil Judge

Tuesday, the Twenty Ninth day of August, 2023

O.S.No. 115 of 2016

Between: Mandalapu Lakshmi, w/o Chinna Ranga Rao, aged about 42 years, Hindu, Housewife, r/o Bodilaveedu village, Gundlapadu padu post, Veldurthi Mandal, Guntur District. … Plaintiff And.,

1. Ravella Visalakshamma, w/o Siva Narayana, aged 58 years, Hindu, housewife, r/o Katakanipalli village, Dornala mandal, Prakasam District.

2. Ravellava Krishnamma, w/o Ramulu, aged 56 years, Hindu, housewife, r/o Katakanipalli village, Dornala Mandal, Prakasam District.

3. Ravella Dhanamma, w/o Venkateswarlu, aged 53 years, Hindu, housewife,r/o Marrivemula village, Pullacheruvu Mandal, Prakasam District.

4. Ravoori Hymavathi, s/o Venkatadri Naidu, aged 51 years, Hindu, housewife, r/o Marrivemula village, Pullacheruvu Mandal, Prakasam District. … Defendants This is a suit filed for partition of plaint schedule properties into five equal shares for allotment and separate possession of one such share to plaintiff and for mesne profits and for costs.

This suit coming on this day for final hearing before me in the presence of Sri P. Satyanarayana, advocate for plaintiff; and of Sri B. Suresh Kumar, advocate for defendant No.1; and defendant Nos.2 to 4 remained ex parte on 15.12.2016,and upon perusing the material on record; and having stood over for consideration till this day, the Court delivered the following___

JUDGMENT

As per the directions in the Judgment and preliminary decree dated 25.11.2022, passed in the suit, plaintiff has taken steps by way of filing petition under Order 20 rule 18 of CPC and the same was numbered as IA No.32 of 2023, the same stands posted for report of advocate commissioner. Since the plaintiff has taken steps under Order 20 rule 18 of CPC, and since both the suit and final decree petition in IA No.32 of 2023 are shown as pending cases in e-courts, the suit is closed for the present. Office is directed to put up the suit docket while passing final orders in IA No.32 of 2023.

Accordingly, the suit is closed.

Pronounced by me in open court, this the 29 th day of August, 2023.

Sd/- GLV Prasad

SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE,

DARSI.

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

NIL

ILD/- GLV

SCJ, DARSI.