1
IN THE COURT OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE:: AT SHADNAGAR
DATED THIS THE 15TH DAY JUNE 2017
PRESENT: SMT. G. PRATHIBHA DEVI, B.SC., M.L.,
SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE,
SHADNAGAR.
OS NO.43 OF 2016
Between
1. Mutyala Nirmala
2. Mutyala Gopal Reddy through GPA holder Vanga Surender Reddy.
..Plaintiffs.
AND
Chilkamarry Lingam …Defendant.
@ @ @
This suit is coming on 12-6-2017 for hearing before me in the presence of Sri Mangu Praveen Kumar, Advocate for the plaintiffs. Defendant remained exparte and upon perusing the material papers on record and having stood- over for consideration till this day, the court delivered the following:
J U D G M E N T
The plaintiffs filed the suit for declaration of title and recovery of possession of suit land and consequential injunction in respect of the suit land restraining the defendant from digging the pits for plantation of Mango trees over the suit land situated at Kishannagar vlg, Farooqnagar mandal.
2
1.The brief averments of the plaint are that, the plaintiff No.1 is wife of the plaintiff No.2 both residents of Bidar, Karnataka state. The defendant is permanent resident of Kishannagar village. The land in Sy.No.491 originally belongs to one Vanga Shyamsunder Reddy who is bother of the plaintiff No.1.
The plaintiff No.1 purchased the suit land in Sy.No.491/A extent ac.2-26 gts along with other lands through registered sale deed and obtained possession, her name was implemented in the revenue records.
Subsequently the plaintiff No.1 sold the land in Sy.No.491/A to an extent of ac.1-25 gts to plaintiff No.2 and one Vanga Surender Reddy who is her own brother through registered document dated 26-9-2008 and delivered possession. So the plaintiff No.1 remained with the land to an extent of ac.1- 01 gts in Syu.No.491/A So the plaintiff No.2 and Vanga Surender Reddy implemented their names in the revenue records for an extent of ac.0-32 gts and ac.0-33 gts respectively. The revenue officials allotted sub division numbers also.
The plaintiffs being the residents of Bidar, so they could not cultivate their lands personally hence they appointed one Vanga Surender Reddy, who is own brother of plaintiff No.1 as General Power of Attorney holder through two GPA documents dated 17-10-2014 and 20-10-2014 to look-after their lands by cultivating the same. Earlier one J. Amaiah tried to interfere with the possession as such the plaintiff through GPA holder filed a suit in OS No.320 of 2014 for perpetual injunction and obtained decree.
The defendant is no way concerned with the suit land so without any manner of right or title trying to interfere with the peaceful possession of the plaintiffs. On 25-7-2016 the defendant along with unsocial elements trespassed into the suit land and occupied the same. So their G.P.A.
questioned the defendant for his illegal occupancy but the defendant threatened the plaintiffs as well as GPA holder. So they conducted panchayati
before the elders. Since the defendant illegally occupied the suit schedule
property trying to dig the pits for plantation of mango trees, which is depriving the valuable rights of the plaintiffs, the plaintiffs constrained to file the suit seeking declaration of title and recovery of possession and as the defendant is changing nature of the agricultural land by making pits for plantation of mango garden. Hence prays the court to decree the suit.
3
2.The defendant remained exparte.
3.Now the point for consideration is whether the plaintiffs are entitled for the relief as prayed for?
4.The General Power of Holder who filed the suit on behalf of the plaintiffs examined as PW1 and corroborated the pleadings in the plaint.
According to PW1 the plaintiff No.1 purchased an extent of ac.2-26 gts from
Vanga Shyamsunder Reddy under a registered sale deed on 31-12-1997, which is marked as Ex.A1. Subsequently she sold ac.1-25 gts to her husband i.e. plaintiff No.2 and to this witness under registered sale deed dated 26-9- 2008 which marked as Ex.A2. So PW1 and the plaintiff No.2 purchased 32 gts and 33 gts respectively from plaintiff No.1 under Ex.A2. Ex.A3 and Ex.A4 certified copies of GPA in favour of PW1 executed by the plaintiffs No.1 and
2. Ex.A5 is certified copy of 1-B ROR form in favour of the plaintiff No.1.
Ex.A6 is certified copy of pahani for the year 2015-16 1425 F in favour of the plaintiff No.1. Ex.A7 is certified copy of 1-B form in favour of plaintiff No.2
Ex.A8 is certified copy of pahani for the year 2015-16 1425 F in favour of the plaintiff No.2. So the above documents evidencing title in favour of the plaintiffs in respect of the suit schedule property.
5.The cause of action for the plaintiffs to file the suit is the defendant has occupied the suit property on 25-7-2016. So they conducted meeting but the defendant failed to listen and threaten the village elders as well as the plaintiffs and PW1. Since the defendant without having any manner of right illegally trespassed into the land of the plaintiffs and occupied and also trying to change nature of the property by digging pits for plantation of the mango garden. So the learned counsel for plaintiffs has argued that if the suit is not decreed in favour of the plaintiffs, the plaintiffs will suffer loss as being owners of the suit land, taking their absence the defendant has trespassed into the land of the plaintiffs and occupied the same. So the plaintiffs constrained to file the suit for declaration of title and also recovery of possession and also injunction as the defendant started digging the pits in the suit land in order to plantation of Mango garden, even though the plaintiffs are not in possession of the property by the date of filing of the suit since the suit is filed for declaration and recovery of possession but the learned counsel for plaintiff argued that the plaintiffs are seeking only 4 restraining the defendant not to dig the pits in the agricultural lands, if he is allowed to dig the pits the nature of the land will be changed. So I am convinced with arguments of the plaintiffs’ counsel in this aspect. So the available material is sufficient for the plaintiffs to answer the point in their favour. Hence the point is answered accordingly in favour of the plaintiffs and against the defendant.
6.In the result, the suit claim is proved, suit is decreed with costs declaring the title of plaintiffs No.1 and 2 over the suit land in Sy.No.491/A1 extent Ac.1-01 gts and Sy.No.491/A3 extent 0-32 gts respectively totally ac.1-33 gts situated at Kishan nagar village of Farooqnagar mandal and also directing the defendant to deliver possession of the suit land as shown in red colour of the plaint sketch and also granting perpetual injunction restraining the defendant from digging the pits for plantation of the mango garden in the suit land.
Dictated to the Superintendent, corrected and pronounced by me in
the Open Court on this the 15th day of June, 2017.
Senior Civil Judge,
Shadnagar.
Appendix of evidence Witnesses Examined For plaintiff:-
PW1 Vanga Surender Reddy.
For Defendant: None Exhibits marked
For plaintiff side: Ex.A1 is registered sale deed on 31-12-1997. Ex.A2 is registered sale deed dated 26-9-2008. Ex.A3 and Ex.A4 certified copies of GPA in favour of PW1 executed by the plaintiffs No.1 and 2. Ex.A5 is certified copy of 1-B ROR form in favour of the plaintiff No.1. Ex.A6 is certified copy of pahani for the year 2015-16 1425 F in favour of the plaintiff No.1. Ex.A7 is certified copy of 1-B form in favour of plaintiff No.2 Ex.A8 is certified copy of pahani for the year 2015-16 1425 F in favour of the plaintiff No.2. For defendant side: Nil.
Senior Civil Judge,
Shadnagar.
5
OS No.43 of 2016
Date: 15-6-2017
Order pronounced in the open court vide separately.
In the result, the suit is decreed with costs declaring the plaintiffs No.1 and 2 are the owners of the suit land in
Sy.No.491/A1 extent Ac.1-01 gts and Sy.No.491/A3 extent 0- 32 gts respectively totally 6 ac.1-33 gts situated at Kishan nagar village of Farooqnagar mandal and also directing the defendanttodeliver possession of the suit land as shown in red colour of the plaint sketch and also granting perpetualinjunction restraining the defendant from digging the pits for plantation of the mango garden in the suit land.
SCJ 7
IN THE COURT OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE:: AT SHADNAGAR
TUESDAY, THE 18TH DAY OF OCTOBER,2016
PRESENT: SRI P.V.S.SURYANARAYANA MURTHY,
SECRETARY,
DLSA, MAHABUBNAGAR
FAC SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE,
SHADNAGAR.
O.S.NO. 137 OF 2014
(Old O.S.No.68/2010)
Between 8 1] Thota Devadas, S/o Chennaiah, age 70 years, Occ: Agriculture, [1st plaintiff died and his suit claim is abated] 2] Thota Chenna Keshavulu, S/o Devadas, age 38 years, Occ:Nil, 3] Thota Navaneetha, W/o Chenna Keshavulu, age 30 years,
All R/o Rangapur village, hamlet of Nandigam, Kothur mandal.
…Plaintiffs.
A N D
Thota Veeraiah, S/o Sayanna, age: 60 years, Occ: Agriculture, R/o Rangapur village, hamlet of Nandigam, Kothur mandal.
… Defendant.
Sub:-Suit for issue of permanent injunction against the defendant restraining them from interfering with the possession of plaintiff over suit schedule 03-39 acres. In the land Sy.No.320 as shown in plaint sketch situated at Nandigam village, Kothur Mandal.
@ @ @
This Suit is coming on 18-10-2016 for hearing before me in the presence of Sri D.Narsimulu, Advocate for the Plaintiff Nos.2 and 3 and of Sri T.Vijaya Bhaskar Reddy, Advocate for the Defendant and upon perusing the material papers on record and having stood-over for consideration till this day, the court delivered the following:
JUDGMENT
Costs of Rs.150/- not paid. Plaintiffs 2 and 3 called absent. No representation though waited till 3.30 p.m. Hence this suit is dismissed for default. No Costs.
Pronounced by me in the Open Court on this the 18th day October, 2016.
SECRETARY,
District Legal Services Authority, Mahabubnagar FAC.Senior Civil Judge, Shadnagar. Appendix of evidence Witnesses Examined -NIL-
SECRETARY,
District Legal Services Authority, Mahabubnagar 9
FAC.Senior Civil Judge, Shadnagar.
IN THE COURT OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE:: AT SHADNAGAR
TUESDAY, THE 25 TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2016
PRESENT: SRI P.V.S.SURYANARAYANA MURTHY,
SECRETARY,
DLSA, MAHABUBNAGAR
FAC SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE,
SHADNAGAR.
O.S.NO. 323 OF 2014
Between
1.Balakistaiah, S/o Late Pentaiah, age 65 years, Agriculture,
2.Chakali Bikshapathi, S/o Late Pentaiah ,age 48 years, Agriculture,
3.C.Anjaiah, S/o Late Pentaiah, age 35 years, Agriculture,
4.C.Mallesh, S/o Chinna Kistaiah, age: 36 years, Agriculture,
5.C.Sathyaiah, S/o Chinna Kistaiah, age : 32 years, Agriculture,
All R/o Mekaguda h/o Nadigama village, Kothur Mandal, Mahabubnagar District.
... Plaintiffs.
And
1]C.Bikshapathi, S/o Anjaiah, Age: 46 years, Agriculture, 2]C.Narsimha, S/o Anjaiah Age: 26 years, Agriculture, 3]C.Jangamma, W/o Anjaiah, Age: 66 years, House hold, 4]C.Lingaiah, S/o Jangaiah, age: 67 years, Agriculture, 10 5]Kummari Ramulu, S/o Nagaiah Age:58 years, Agriculture, 6]Kummari Laxmaiah, S/o Nagaiah, Age: 56 years, Agriculture.
All R/o Mekaguda h/o Nadigama village, Kothut Mandal, Mahabubnagar District.
…Defendants
This Suit coming on 25-10-2016 for final hearing before me in the presence of Sri K.Anand Rao, Advocate for the Plaintiffs and of Sri K.Manohar Reddy, Advocate for the Defendant No.1 and of Sri N.Ramesh Babu, Advocate for Defendant No.2, and Defendant Nos.3 to 6 are set exparte, upon perusing the material papers on record and having stood-over for consideration till this day, the court delivered the following:
JUDGMENT
Heard the plaintiff counsel. He has submitted that he has filed the
Memo on 30.08.2016 seeking permission not press the suit. Perused the
Memo, dated 30.08.2016 wherein the plaintiffs stated that they are not pressing the suit and also affixed the signatures of plaintiffs 2 to 5 and thumb impression of 1st plaintiff. Sri N.Ramesh Babu, Advocate for 2nd
Defendant seeking time. As seen from the record sufficient time is given to the 2nd Defendant. Hence further time is refused. Memo, dated 30.08.2016 is recorded suit is dismissed as not pressed.
Pronounced by me in the Open Court on this the 25th day October, 2016.
SECRETARY,
District Legal Services Authority, Mahabubnagar FAC.Senior Civil Judge, Shadnagar.
Appendix of evidence
Witnesses Examined -NIL-
SECRETARY,
District Legal Services Authority, Mahabubnagar 11
FAC.Senior Civil Judge, Shadnagar.
IN THE COURT OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE:: AT SHADNAGAR
TUESDAY, THE 27 TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2016
12
PRESENT: SRI P.V.S.SURYANARAYANA MURTHY,
SECRETARY,
DLSA, MAHABUBNAGAR
FAC SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE,
SHADNAGAR.
O.S.NO. 11 OF 2015
Between 1] Smt.S. Laxmamma W/o Badradri, Age: 48 years, Occ: Agriculture,
R/o. Papireddyguda Village, Keshampet Mandal, mahabubnagar
District.
2] S. Anjaiah S/o Narayana, Age: 85 years, Occ:Nil,
R/o. Papireddyguda Village, Keshampet Mandal, mahabubnagar
District.
.... Plaintiffs.
A N D 1]Uddaraju Surya Narayana Raju S/o Bapi Raju, Age: 63 years,
Occ: Business, R/o.H.No. 11-32, Sahara Complex, Surya Hard-
Ware and Electricals, Shamshabad, Ranga Reddy District.
2]Uddaraju Venkatapathi Raju S/o U. Surya Narayana Raju, Age:
41 years, Occ: Business, R/o.H.No. 11-32, Sahara Complex,
Surya Hard-Ware and Electricals, Shamshabad, Ranga Reddy
District.
3]Uddaraju Suribabu S/o U. Surya Narayana Raju, Age: 28 years,
Occ: Business, R/o.H.No. 11-32, Sahara Complex, Surya Hard-
Ware and Electricals, Shamshabad, Ranga Reddy District.
....
Defendants @ @ @ 13
This Suit coming on 27.09.2016 for final hearing before me in the presence of Sri K. Pratap Kumar, Advocate for the Plaintiffs and Sri M.A. Kareem, Advocate for the Defendants and upon perusing the material papers on record and having stood-over for consideration till this day, the court delivered the following:
O R D E R
1st plaintiff present and filed a memo stating that she is not pressing the suit. It is further mentioned that plaintiff No.2 died 1 year back. No steps taken. Hence claim of 2nd plaintiff dismissed as abated. Suit of the 1st plaintiff is dismissed as not pressed. No costs.
Pronounced by me in the open court on this the 27th day September,2016.
Secretary,
DLSA., Mahabubnagar
FAC Senior Civil Judge,
Shadnaga
IN THE COURT OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE:: AT SHADNAGAR
TUESDAY, THE 18 TH DAY OF OCTOBER,2016
PRESENT: SRI P.V.S.SURYANARAYANA MURTHY,
SECRETARY,
DLSA, MAHABUBNAGAR
FAC SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE,
SHADNAGAR.
O.S.NO. 137 OF 2014
Between (Old O.S.No. 68/2010 ) 1] Thota Devadas s/o Chennaiah, Age: 70 years, Occ: Agriculture, 14 2] Thota Chenna Keshavulu S/o Devadas , Age: 38 years, Occ:Nil, 3] Thota Navaneetha w/o Chenna keshavulu age 30 years,
All R/o Rangapur village, hamlet of Nandigam, Kothur mandal.
.... Plaintiffs.
A N D 1] Thota Veeraiah S/o Sayanna , Age: 60 years, Occ: Agrl,
R/o Rangapur village ,hamlet of Nandigam ,Kothur mandal.
…. Defendant.
@ @ @
This Suit coming on 18-10-2016 hearing before me in the presence of Sri D.Narsimulu, Advocate for the Plaintiffs and Sri T.Vijaya Bhaskara Reddy,Advocate for the Defendant and upon perusing the material papers on record and having stood-over for consideration till this day, the court delivered the following:
O R D E R
Costs of Rs.150/- not paid plaintiffs 2 and 3 called absent. No representation though waited till 3.30 p.m. Hence this suit is dismissed for default. No Costs.
Pronounced by me in the open court on this the 18th day october,2016.
Secretary,
DLSA., Mahabubnagar
FAC Senior Civil Judge,
Shadnagar.
IN THE COURT OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE:: AT SHADNAGAR
15
TUESDAY,THIS THE 25 TH DAY OF OCOTBER, 2016
PRESENT: SRI P.V.S.SURYANARAYANA MURTHY,
SECRETARY,
DLSA, MAHABUBNAGAR
FAC SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE,
SHADNAGAR.
O.S.NO. 7 OF 2016
Between
1. M.D. Afzal s /o Late Mohd.Azam, aged about 60 years Occ:
Business
R/o. H.No .18-1-3501135 , Yousuffain Colony, Cahandrayangutta,
Hyderabad City .
.... Plaintiffs.
A N D
1. Lambadi Keshavulu S/o Anshu, aged about 55 Years ,Occ:
Business , ,.
2. Lambadi Balu s/o Ashu , aged 52 years ,
3. Lambadi Hariya S/o Anshu aged 50 years, Occ, Business , 4 Lambadi Jamla S/o Anshu age 51 years occ, Business 5 Lambadi Laxman s/o, Anshu age 55 yrs ,Occu Business ,
6. Lambadi Redy s/o Anshu 43 years , Occ: Business , No. 1 to 6
Are R/o Annaram Thanda Farooqnagar Mandal, (Shadnagar )
Mhahabubnagar Dist, TS.
16
... Defendants
[[[[ @ @ @
This Suit coming on 25.10.2016 for final hearing before me in the presence of
Sri B.Chandraiah, Advocate for the Plaintiff and Sri K.Mohan Rao, Advocate for the
Defendants and upon perusing the material papers on record and having stood-over for consideration till this day, the court delivered the following:
O R D E R
Plaintiff called absent. No representation though waited till 1.40 p.m.
Hence ,the suit is dismissed for default. No Costs.
Pronounced by me in the open court on this the 25th day October,2016.
Secretary,
DLSA., Mahabubnagar
FAC Senior Civil Judge,
Shadnagar.
IN THE COURT OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE:: AT SHADNAGAR
TUESDAY, THE 25 TH DAY OF OCOTBER, 2016
PRESENT: SRI P.V.S.SURYANARAYANA MURTHY,
SECRETARY,
DLSA, MAHABUBNAGAR
FAC SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE,
SHADNAGAR.
O.S.NO. 155 OF 2014
17
Between
1. Myakala Rangamma w/o Anjaiah, age 54 years ,
R/o.Lingampally village of Kulakcherla, mandal RangaReddy Distirict.
2. Parvatheamma w/o Mogualaiah, age 52 years, R/o Kudanpoor,
Mandal
Pargi, RangaReddy Dist.
3. T.Padmamma w/o Narsimulu age 50 years ar/0 Chegur,(m) Kothur ,Mahabubunagar Dist.
4. Manaemma D/o Adivaiah age 32 yrs ,R/o Elikatta, (m) Fauqnagar,
Mahabubnagar Dist.
5. Savithramma w/o Yadaiah age 32 yrs ,R/o and Mandal Balanagar,
Mahabubnagar Dist. All Occupation are Agriculture ....
Plaintiffs.
A N D
1. Ambati Yadaiah S/o Adivaiah , Age: 35 years, Occ: Agriculture ,.
2.Ambati Anjaiah S/o Chennaiah, aged 41 years ,
3.Ambati LaxmaiahS/o Chennaiah aged 41 years, Occ,
Agriculture
4. Ambati Bheemaiah S/o Chennaiah age 48 years occ,
Agriculture
5. , Ambati Bharathamma w/o Late Ramulu, age 48 yrs ,Occu
Agriculture ,
All R/o Elikatta village of faruqnagaar Mandal, Mahabubnagar Dist.
6. Mr. Akula Ravikumar s/o Late A. Venaiah aged about 45 years ,Occu: Business ,R/o H.No. 3-240, Padmavathicolony
Shadnagar , farooqnagar ...
Defendants 18 [[[[ @ @ @
This Suit coming on 25.10.2016 for final hearing before me in the presence of Sri p.krishns Reddy Advocate for the Plaintiffs and Sri M.Mohan Rao, Advocate for the Defendants and upon perusing the material papers on record and having stood-over for consideration till this day, the court delivered the following:
O R D E R
Sri. B, Raja Sekhar Raju, Advocate for plaintiffs not pressed the Suit and made endorsement to that effect. Hence the suit is dismissed as not pressed. No Costs.
DLSA., Mahabubnagar
FAC Senior Civil Judge,
Shadnagar
IN THE COURT OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE:: AT SHADNAGAR
TUESDAY,THIS THE 25 TH DAY OF OCOTBER, 2016
PRESENT: SRI P.V.S.SURYANARAYANA MURTHY,
SECRETARY,
DLSA, MAHABUBNAGAR
FAC SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE,
SHADNAGAR.
O.S.NO. 323 OF 2014
Between
1.Balakistaiah S /o Late Pentaiah, age 65 years, Occ, Agril, 19
2.Chakali Bikshapathi s/o o Late Pentaiah,Age : 48 years , Occ;
Agril
3.C.Anjaish s/o Late pentaiah age ,35 years , Occ: Agril
4.C. Mallesh S/o Chinna Kistaiah , age ;36 yers ,Occ; Agril ,
5. C.Sathyaiah S/o Chinna Kistaiah, Age ,32 years Occ; Agril
All are Mekaguda H/o Nandigama villagea , Kothur mandal.
.... Plaintiffs.
A N D
1. C.Bikshapathi S/o Anjaiah aged about 46 Years ,Occ:Agril
2. C.Narsimha s/ o Anjaiah, aged 26 years Occ; Agril
3. C.Jangamma w/o o Anjaiah aged 66 years, Occ,Agril
4. C.Lingaiah S/o Jangaiah age 67 years occ,Agril
5. Kummari Ramulu s/o, Nagaiah age 58 yrs ,Occu Agril
6. Kummari Laxmaiah s/o Nagaiah 56 years , Occ: Agril,
All Are R/o Mekaguda h/o Nandigama village, Kothur Mandal.
... Defendants
[[[[ @ @ @
This Suit coming on 25.10.2016 for setlment hearing before me in the presence of Sri K.Anand rao, Advocate for the Plaintiff and Sri M.Sreedhar and N.Ramaesh Babu Advocates for the Defendants and upon perusing the material papers on record and having stood-over for consideration till this day, the court delivered the following:
O R D E R
Heard the plaintiff counsel . He has submitted that he has filed the
Memo on 30.08.2016 seeking permission not press the suit. Perused the
Memo, dated 30.08.2016 wherein the plaintiffs stated that they are not 20 pressing the suit and also affixed the signatures of plaintiffs 2 to 5 and thumb impression of 1st plaintiff. Sri N.Ramesh Babu ,Advocate for 2nd
Defendant seeking time. As seen from the record sufficient time is given to the 2nd Defendant .Hence further time is refused. Memo, dated 30.08.2016 is recorded suit is dismissed as not pressed.
Pronounced by me in the open court on this the 25th day October,2016.
Secretary,
DLSA., Mahabubnagar
FAC Senior Civil Judge,
Shadnagar
IN THE COURT OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE:: AT SHADNAGAR
TUESDAY,THIS THE 25 TH DAY OF OCOTBER, 2016
PRESENT: SRI P.V.S.SURYANARAYANA MURTHY,
SECRETARY,
DLSA, MAHABUBNAGAR
FAC SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE,
SHADNAGAR.
O.S.NO. 122 OF 2014
Between
1.Bendi Narsimha Reddy S /o Late Chenakista Reddy, died by
LRs
2.Bendi Ramchandramma W/o Late Chenakista Reddy ,Age :54 years , Occ; Agril ,R/o Gunded Village, Balanagar Mandal.
21
3.K.Sshantha W/o B.Narsimha Reddy, age 38 years Occ: Teacher ,
R/o at present Hyderabad .
4.B.Mahati Krishna D/o B.Narsimha Reddy Minor,
5. B.Rama Kirshna Reddy S/o B.Narsimha Reddy, Minor, .
BOTH R/O HYDERABAD.
.
…Plaintiffs.
A N D
1. Bendi Ramchandra Reddy S/o Late Ram Reddy ,Age 75 years ,Occ:
Agriculture, R/o Ellikatta Village, Presently residing at Shadnagar behind
Sub- Treasury Office, Shadnagar.
2. Bendi Ram Reddy s/ o Bendi Ramchandra Reddy ,died LRs,
3. Bendi Narsimha Reddy S/o Bendi Ramchandra Reddy aged 37 years, Occ;Contractor, R/o H.No. 3-6-284/A ,Second Floor,
Hydeaguda Hyderabad .l
4. Bendi Samir Chandra Reddy S/o B.Rma Reddy ,age 20 years R/o
H.No. 16-3-991/2 ,Officers colony behind B.B. Cancer Hospital,
New Malakpet , Hyderabad.
5. Bendi Jaichandra Reddy S/o B.Rma Reddy age 19 yrs ,R/o 16- 991/2 Officers coony ,New Malakpet, Hyderabad .l
6. Bendi Dushant Reddy S/o Bendi Narsimha Reddy 25 years ,
Occ:Business R/o H.No. 3-6-284/A ,Second Floor, Hyderguda,
Hyderabad.
7. Bendi Pulla Reddy S/o Late Venkat Reddy, Age 60 years ,Occ ,R/o
Ellikatta Village, Farooqnagar Mandal .
8. Bendi Madhava Reddy S/o Late Venkat Reddy ,Age 50 years
Contractor and Bore wells driller, R/o Shadnagar .
9. Bendi Sudharshan Reddy S/o late Ram Reddy, Age 27 years ,Occ: agril R/o 12-78, Opp: Tp Hotel Devi Prasad, Venkateshwara
Colony , Shadnagar.
22
10. B.Surender Reddy S/o Late Ram Reddy ,age 29 years , Occ: Agril,
R/o 12-78 ,Opp Tp Hotel Devi Prasad, Venkateshwara Colony ,
Shadnagar
11. Bendi Surender Reddy s/o Late Ram Reddy ,Age 24 years Occ:
Agriculture R/o Vemuanarva, Keshampet Mandal.
12. Bendi Srinivas Reddy S/o B. Madhava Reddy ,Age 22 years, Occ:
Agril, R/o Balaji Bore Wells, Shadnagar.
13 Bendi Jai Simha ReddyS/o B. Madhava Reddy ,Age 20 years R/o
Balaji Bore Wells, Shadnagar.
14. Bendi Srinivas Reddy S/o late B.Narayan Reddy, Age 27 years ,Occ: Agriculture, R/o Ellikatta village of Farooqnagar mandal.
15 .Bendi Ranga Reddy S/o B. Narayan Reddy, Age 26 years, occ:
Agriculture,R/o Ellikatta village of Farooqnagar mandal.
16. Bendi Govind Reddy S/o B. Narayan Reddy, Age 19 years, occ:
Agriculture
R/o Ellikatta village of Farooqnagar mandal.
17. Bendi Venkatamma W/o late B. Narayan Reddy Age 55 years , R/o
Ellikatta village of Farooqnagar mandal
18. Shankarammma W/o Ananth Reddy, Age 40 years, occ: House hold,
R/o Manmarri Village, Shahabad Mandal, R.R. Dist.
19. Smt. A. Manjusha W/o A. Ramakirshna Reddy, Age about 40 years, occ: House wife , R/o H.No. 2-3-681/B ,New Turumala Colony ,Amberpet, Hyderabad.
20. B.Samerchandra Reddy S/o Late Ram Reddy ,aged about 37 years,
Occ: pvt. Employee ,
21. Smt. C. Sirisha W/o C.Srinivas Reddy ,D/o late Ram Reddy, Aged about 35 years ,Occ: House wife.
22. B.Naveenchandra Reddy S/o Late Ram Reddy ,Age about 34 years,
Occ; pvt. Employee, 20 to 22 are R/o H.No. 16-3-991/12, Officers colony ,Malakpet,
Hyderabad .
23 (Defedant No.2 died ,by the orders of the Hon’ble Court, defendant No.
19 to 22 added vide I.A.No. 5/2014 ,Dt. 5-03-2014 )
DEFENDANTS.
[[[[ @ @ @
This Suit coming on 25.10.2016 for final hearing before me in the presence of Sri K.Prabhu, Advocate for the Plaintiff and Sri E.Jangaiah Advocate for the Defendants and upon perusing the material papers on record and having stood-over for consideration till this day, the court delivered the following:
O R D E R
Publication not filed. Plaintiffs 2 to 5 are called absent. No representation though waited till 1.30 p.m. Hence claim against Defendants 3 to 8,11,12,20 to 22 dismissed for default. Plaintiffs fails to appear before the Court to prosecute the Suit and there is no representation. Furthermore previously the suit was dismissed for default and again restored. Even then the plaintiffs did not evince interest to prosecute the matter. Hence there are no grounds to grant further time. Hence the suit is dismissed to default. No
Costs.
Pronounced by me in the open court on this the 25th day October,2016.
Secretary,
DLSA., Mahabubnagar
FAC Senior Civil Judge,
Shadnagar 24 25
IN THE COURT OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE:: AT SHADNAGAR
TUESDAY, THIS THE 25 TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2016
PRESENT: SRI P.V.S.SURYANARAYANA MURTHY,
SECRETARY,
DLSA, MAHABUBNAGAR
FAC SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE,
SHADNAGAR.
O.S.NO. 89 OF 2014
Between
1. Madugula Narsimha S/o late Madugula Ramaiah 55 years
2. Madugula Krishnaiah S/o late Madugula Ramaiah 37 years
3. Madugual Chandraiah S/o late Madugula Ramaiah 30 years
All R/o Chowelpally Village of Farooqnagar mandal.
.... Plaintiffs.
A N D
1. The Collector, Mahabubnagar .
2 . The Revenue Divisional Officer Mahabubnagar.
3. The Tahasildar Shadnagar.
4. Pittala Narsimulu S/o late Pittala Pullaiah 55 years ,
5. Pittala Ramulu S/o o late Pittala Pullaiah 40 years ,
6. Pittala Ranchandriah S/o late Pittala Pullaiah 35 years,
7. Pittala Ananthaiah S/o late Pittala Pullaiah 32 years,
All r/o Mogalgidda billage Farooqnagar Mandal.
.... Defendants
26 @ @ @
This Suit coming on 25.10.2016 for trial hearing before me in the presence of SriG.Venu Gopal,Advocate for the Plaintiffs and Asst Govt pleader D1 to 3 and Sri J.Ravi kumar, Advocate for the Defendants and upon perusing the material papers on record and having stood-over for consideration till this day, the court delivered the following:
O R D E R
Costs not paid. Plaintiffs called absent. No representation though waited till 1.45 p.m. Hence ,the suit is dismissed for default. No Costs
Pronounced by me in the open court on this the 25th day October, 2016.
Secretary,
DLSA., Mahabubnagar
FAC Senior Civil Judge
IN THE COURT OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE:: AT SHADNAGAR
TUESDAY, THE 1 ST DAY OF NOVEMBER , 2016
PRESENT: SRI P.V.S.SURYANARAYANA MURTHY,
SECRETARY,
27
DLSA, MAHABUBNAGAR
FAC SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE,
SHADNAGAR.
O.S.NO. 171 OF 2014
Between
1. Nazeer Ahmed S/o Late Jaleel Ahmed @ Abdul Jaleel, age : 46 years, Occ: Agriculture
2. Habeeb Ahmed. S/o Late Jaleel Ahmed @ Abdul Jaleel, Age: 42 years, Occ : Agriculture
3.Abdul Rawoof. S/o Late Jaleel Ahmed @ Abdul Jaleel, Age:38 years, Occ: Agriculture
4. zareena Begum. w/o Late Bhaseer Ahmed ,Age : 42 years,
Occupation: House Hold
5. Meena Samreen D/o Late Bhaseer Ahmed, Age 22 years,
Occupation: house hold
6. Mohd. Abdul Khader Jeelani S/o Late Bhaseer Ahmed, Age 14 years
Occupation : Student under the guardian ship and represented by the next friend of minor namely Zareena Begum w/o Bhaseer Ahmed, age 42 years occupation ;House hold (the plaintiff No.4 )
7. Aswiya samreen D/o Late Bhaseer Ahmed ,Age 12 years (minor ) under the guardianship and represented by the next friend of minor namely Zareena Begum W/o Late Bhaseer Ahmed, Age 42 years
Occupation; House hold. (the plaintiff No. 4 )
8. Raheen Begum W/o Mohd .Jaffer, Age; 35 years occupation ;
House hold,
All R/o H.No. 1-78 Simla Colony ,Shadnagar, near National highway No.
Farooqnagar Mandal, Mahabubnagar District.
.... Plaintiffs.
A N D 28 1.Jameel Ahmed @ Chunnu Miya S/o Late Bademiya @
GulmMahaboob, Age , 70 years, occupation Agriculture ,R/o Mogalgidda village ,Farooqnagar mandal. Defedant
Mahabubnagar District 2.Akhil Ahmed S/o Jameel Ahmed @ Chunnu Miya R/oMogalgiddavillage of Farooqnagar mandal, Mahabubnagar District.
3. SKG Refractories Ltd, represented by its Managing Director ,
Sri.Anil Kumar Agarwal S/o Late, R.K. Agarwal, Age 64 years ,Occ; Business Regd . Office : 7-4 Beside over bridge,
Sanathnagar ,Hyderabad-500018.
....
…Defendants @ @ @
This Suit coming on 1.11.2016 for final hearing before me in the presence of Sri Veenith Kumar ,Sri K.Srisailam Advocates for the Plaintiffs and Sri M.A. Kareem, Advocate for the Defendants 1and 2 ,D3 dismissed upon perusing the material papers on record and having stood-over for consideration till this day, the court delivered the following:
O R D E R
Costs of Rs. 100/- not paid plaintiffs called absent .No representation though waited till 1.30 p.m. Hence this suit is dismissed for default .No Costs.
Pronounced by me in the open court on this the 1st day November ,2016.
Secretary,
DLSA., Mahabubnagar
FAC Senior Civil Judge, 29
Shadnagar
IN THE COURT OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE:: AT SHADNAGAR
TUESDAY, THE 1 ST DAY OF NOVEMBER , 2016
PRESENT: SRI P.V.S.SURYANARAYANA MURTHY,
SECRETARY,
DLSA, MAHABUBNAGAR
FAC SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE,
SHADNAGAR.
30
O.S.NO. 153 OF 2014
Between
1. Smt. Neelamma wife of Shekharaiah, age 25 years, occupation agriculture resident of Chilkamarri village, Farooqnagar mandal, Mahabubnagar Distirict.
2. Smt.Amruthawife of Anjaiah, occupation agriculture resident of Chilkamarri village, Farooqnagar mandal, Mahabubnagar Distirict
3.Kum. Anasuya daughter of Guvvala Narsaiah , age 13 years, minor, Represented through her natural mother Smt. Narsamma w/o G.Chandraiah ,age about 50 years ,occupation agriculture ,resident of Ravirala village of Kondurg Mandal, Mahabubnagar District.
.... Plaintiffs.
A N D
1.Gavvala Chandraiahs/Guvvala Narsaiah age 60 years, o/cagriculture
2. Parvathamma 2nd wife of Chandaraiah, age 45 years,
3. Ramulu so of Chandaraiah, age 25 years,
4. Mallaiah so of chandraiah, age 25 years,
5. Narsimulu s0 of Chandraiah, age 19 years,
Defendants No. 1 to 6 residents of Ravirala village, Kondurg Mandal,
Bhagyamma wife of Chennaiah, age 27 years, occupation house hold,
6. All resident of Ravirala village of Kondurg mandal, Mahabubnagar district …Defendants 31
This Suit coming on 1.11.2016 for final hearing before me in the presence of Sri B.Janardhan Advocate for the Plaintiffs and Sri Sivanna , Advocate for the Defendants upon perusing the material papers on record and having stood-over for consideration till this day, the court delivered the following:
Order
Plaintiffs called absent no representation though waited till 1.40 p.m. Hence chief of pw1 is closed .Suit of the plaintiffs dismissed for default .No Costs.
Pronounced by me in the open court on this the 1st day November ,2016.
Secretary,
DLSA., Mahabubnagar
FAC Senior Civil Judge,
Shadnagar
IN THE COURT OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE:: AT SHADNAGAR
TUESDAY, THE 27 TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2016
32
PRESENT: SRI P.V.S.SURYANARAYANA MURTHY,
SECRETARY,
DLSA, MAHABUBNAGAR
FAC SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE,
SHADNAGAR.
O.S.NO. 11 OF 2015
Between 1] Smt.S. Laxmamma W/o Badradri, Age: 48 years, Occ: Agriculture,
R/o. Papireddyguda Village, Keshampet Mandal, mahabubnagar
District.
2] S. Anjaiah S/o Narayana, Age: 85 years, Occ:Nil,
R/o. Papireddyguda Village, Keshampet Mandal, mahabubnagar
District.
.... Plaintiffs.
A N D 1]Uddaraju Surya Narayana Raju S/o Bapi Raju, Age: 63 years,
Occ: Business, R/o.H.No. 11-32, Sahara Complex, Surya Hard-
Ware and Electricals, Shamshabad, Ranga Reddy District.
2]Uddaraju Venkatapathi Raju S/o U. Surya Narayana Raju, Age:
41 years, Occ: Business, R/o.H.No. 11-32, Sahara Complex,
Surya Hard-Ware and Electricals, Shamshabad, Ranga Reddy
District.
3]Uddaraju Suribabu S/o U. Surya Narayana Raju, Age: 28 years,
Occ: Business, R/o.H.No. 11-32, Sahara Complex, Surya Hard-
Ware and Electricals, Shamshabad, Ranga Reddy District.
....
Defendants 33 @ @ @
This Suit coming on 27.09.2016 for final hearing before me in the presence of Sri K. Pratap Kumar, Advocate for the Plaintiffs and Sri M.A. Kareem, Advocate for the Defendants and upon perusing the material papers on record and having stood-over for consideration till this day, the court delivered the following:
O R D E R
1st plaintiff present and filed a memo stating that she is not pressing the suit. It is further mentioned that plaintiff No.2 died 1 year back. No steps taken. Hence claim of 2nd plaintiff dismissed as abated. Suit of the 1st plaintiff is dismissed as not pressed. No costs.
Pronounced by me in the open court on this the 27th day September,2016.
Secretary,
DLSA., Mahabubnagar
FAC Senior Civil Judge,
IN THE COURT OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE:: AT SHADNAGAR
TUESDAY, THE 25 TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2016
PRESENT: SRI P.V.S.SURYANARAYANA MURTHY,
SECRETARY,
DLSA, MAHABUBNAGAR
FAC SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE,
SHADNAGAR.
O.S.NO. 323 OF 2014
Between
6.Balakistaiah, S/o Late Pentaiah, age 65 years, Agriculture, 34
7.Chakali Bikshapathi, S/o Late Pentaiah ,age 48 years, Agriculture,
8.C.Anjaiah, S/o Late Pentaiah, age 35 years, Agriculture,
9.C.Mallesh, S/o Chinna Kistaiah, age: 36 years, Agriculture,
10. C.Sathyaiah, S/o Chinna Kistaiah, age : 32 years, Agriculture,
All R/o Mekaguda h/o Nadigama village, Kothur Mandal, Mahabubnagar District.
... Plaintiffs.
And
1]C.Bikshapathi, S/o Anjaiah, Age: 46 years, Agriculture, 2]C.Narsimha, S/o Anjaiah Age: 26 years, Agriculture, 3]C.Jangamma, W/o Anjaiah, Age: 66 years, House hold, 4]C.Lingaiah, S/o Jangaiah, age: 67 years, Agriculture, 5]Kummari Ramulu, S/o Nagaiah Age:58 years, Agriculture, 6]Kummari Laxmaiah, S/o Nagaiah, Age: 56 years, Agriculture.
All R/o Mekaguda h/o Nadigama village, Kothut Mandal, Mahabubnagar District.
…Defendants
This Suit coming on 25-10-2016 for final hearing before me in the presence of Sri K.Anand Rao, Advocate for the Plaintiffs and of Sri K.Manohar Reddy, Advocate for the Defendant No.1 and of Sri N.Ramesh Babu, Advocate for Defendant No.2, and Defendant Nos.3 to 6 are set exparte, upon perusing the material papers on record and having stood-over for consideration till this day, the court delivered the following:
JUDGMENT
Heard the plaintiff counsel. He has submitted that he has filed the
Memo on 30.08.2016 seeking permission not press the suit. Perused the
Memo, dated 30.08.2016 wherein the plaintiffs stated that they are not 35 pressing the suit and also affixed the signatures of plaintiffs 2 to 5 and thumb impression of 1st plaintiff. Sri N.Ramesh Babu, Advocate for 2nd
Defendant seeking time. As seen from the record sufficient time is given to the 2nd Defendant. Hence further time is refused. Memo, dated 30.08.2016 is recorded suit is dismissed as not pressed.
Pronounced by me in the Open Court on this the 25th day October, 2016.
SECRETARY,
District Legal Services Authority, Mahabubnagar FAC.Senior Civil Judge, Shadnagar.
Appendix of evidence
Witnesses Examined -NIL-
SECRETARY,
District Legal Services Authority, Mahabubnagar FAC.Senior Civil Judge, Shadnagar.