Sri. G. Uday Bhasker Rao

Prl. Senior Civil Judge-cum-Asst.Sessions Judge

Mancherial, SCJ Court Complex · Mancherial · Telangana

Sri. G. Uday Bhasker Rao, Prl. Senior Civil Judge-cum-Asst.Sessions Judge, is posted at Mancherial, SCJ Court Complex, Mancherial, Telangana, India. 1,659 court orders on record since 2017. 5 judgments with full text available. Primarily handles CC, STC, OS cases.

1,659

Total Orders

Judgments

Orders/Month

Postings

Featured Judgments

OS/52/2018

Rathipally bapu vs Rathipally Punnam and five others

07 Mar 2019

IN THE COURT OF THE JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE :AT: CHINNOOR.

PRESENT: Sri. G.Uday Bhasker Rao

Junior Civil Judge, Chennur.

Thursday the 7th day of March, 2019

OS.No.52 OF 2018.

Between:-

Rathipally Bapu, S/o Late Chinna Rajanna, Age: 45 yrs, Occ: Coolie, R/o H.No. 2-68, subbarampaly, Katherasala (GP) Chennur Mandal, Mancherial District.

… Plaintiff // AND //

1) Rathipally Punnam, s/o Late Chinna Rajanna, Age: 39 yrs, Occ: Coolie,

2) Rathipally Chandru, S/o Late Chinna Rajanna, Age: 42 yrs, Occ: Coolie,

3) Rathipally Sadhi @ Sadaiah, S/o Late Chinna Rajanna, Age: 36 yrs, Occ: Coolie,

4) Rathipally Rajakka, W/o Late Chinna Rajanna, Age: 72 yrs, Occ: House wife All are R/o H.No. 2-68, subbarampaly, Katherasala (GP) Chennur Mandal, Mancherial District.

5) Nampally Mallakka, W/o Mallaiah, Age: 48 yrs, Occ: House wife,

6) Karampally Madanakka, W/o Late Pochanna, Age:50yrs, Both are R/o Adhilpet, Ponnaram (GP), Mandamarri Mandal and Mancherial District. … Defendants

This suit coming on 15-02-2019 for final hearing before me in the presence of Sri. Poorna Chandar, Advocate for the Plaintiff and the defendant is set- exparte and having stood over for consideration till this day, the Court delivered the following:-

J U D G E M E N T

This is a suit filed by the plaintiff for partition and allotment of 1/5th share to the plaintiff and for separate possession of the plaintiff over the suit land bearing Sy.No.126/1 measuring Ac.0-12 gts including residential house bearing No. 4-37 in Sy.No. 180/2/B measuring Ac. 0-25 gts and Sy.No. 48/3/B an extent of Ac. 0-05 gts and also constructed a house bearing No. 4-37 in the suit schedule A property at Subbarampally

Shivar which is fully described suit schedule A,B, and C annexed to the 2 plaint. All the properties are in joint possession of the plaintiff and

Defendants.

2.The brief averments of the plaintiff for partition and allotment of 1/5th share to the plaintiff and for separate possession of the plaintiff over the suit land bearing Sy.No.126/1 measuring Ac.0-12 gts including residential house bearing No. 4-37 in Sy.No. 180/2/B measuring Ac. 0-25 gts and Sy.No. 48/3/B an extent of Ac. 0-05 gts and also constructed a house bearing No. 4-37 in the suit schedule A property at Subbarampally

Shivar which is fully described suit schedule A,B, and C annexed to the plaint. All the properties are in joint possession of the plaintiff and

Defendants. The plaintiff submits that said Rathipally Chinna Rajanna died interest on 25-02-2018 leaving behind the plaintiff and defendants as his legal heirs and their successors for the suit schedule lands. The plaintiff and Defendants are belongs to Hindu Region governed by

Mithakshara law. The marriages of D5 and D6 were performed long back prior to 1986, at the time of their marriage they were given sufficient money and property hence the D5 and D6 are not having any rights over the suit lands, so that the plaintiff and defendant No 1 to4 are entitled to each on share in the suit schedule lands. The plaintiff submits that himself and D1 to D3 are in joint possession and enjoyment of the suit lands. After death of their father there was dispute arises among the brothers of the plaintiff. The plaintiff several times demanded the D1 for partition of the suit schedule land and allotment of the 1/5th shar schedule lands, but the efforts and requests of the plaintiff are went a vain. So many times panchayats were held before the village elders and relatives bu the D1 refused to took partition among them. On 05-06- 2018 the plaintiff demanded for partition bu the D1 refused and denied the right of the plaintiff. The plaintiff submit that the suit schedule lands are not partition and it remains in joint possession and enjoyment of the plaint and defendants, plaintiff is entitled to 1/5 th share in the suit schedule lands while D1 to D4 are entitled to each 1/5 th share. The

D5 and D6 are not having any share in the suit schedule land. Hence prays to being necessary parties made as parties or defendants in the suit hence this suit. For partition prays to make five equal share.

3-The defendants had received summons and he did not chose to filed Written Statement hence. Hence on 03-01-2019 this court set- exparte against defendant.

3 4-To substantiate the case of the plaintiff, the plaintiff himself examined as PW1. Ex.A1 to Ex.A5 marked on behalf of plaintiff.

5-Heard the learned counsel for the plaintiff.

Now the point for determination is :

1. Whether the plaintiff is entitled for the relief of partition as prayed for ?.

2. If so, to what relief.

6-The plaintiff No.1 examined himself as PW1, he reiterated the contents of plaint in his chief Ex.A1 to Ex.A5 are marked. Perused the document filed by PW-1 i.e. Ex.A1 to A5 marked, i.e., Ex.A-1 is Pattedar

Pass Book issued by MRO Chennur, Ex.A-2 is Original land Tax Receipt for the year 2001 to 2013 Ex.A-3 is Meeseva computerized pahani for the fasli year 1427, Ex.A-4 is is Meeseva computerized pahani for the fasli year 1427,Ex.A-5 is Meeseva computerized pahani for the fasli year 1427, the Exhibits are reflects the plaintiff is owner and possessor of the suit schedule land on date of filling of the suit. Plaintiff fail to file relevant documents to show that suit schedule properties are ancestors properties, as partition is a title suit plaintiff has to prove the same through reliable documents. The defendant are set ex-parte. In these circumstances the plaintiff has fail to prove his case that suit land is ancestor property. Hence this issue is decided against plaintiff.

ISSUE No.II:

7-The issue No.1 is decided against plaintiff. This issue is also decided against plaintiff.

8-In The result: the suit of the plaintiff is dismissed.

Dictated to Steno, corrected and pronounced by me in the open Court on

this the 7th day of March, 2019.

JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE

CHINNUR.

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

WITNESSES EXAMINED

FOR PLAINTIFFS: FOR DEFENDANTS:

PW-1:Rathipaly Bapu-NIL-

EXHIBITS MARKED

FOR PLAINTIFFS: FOR DEFENDANTS:

Ex.A-1 is Pattedar Pass Book issued by MRO Chennur,

Ex.A-2 is Original land Tax Receipt for the year 2001 to 2013

Ex.A-3 is Meeseva computerized pahani for the fasli year 1427 Ex.A-4 is is Meeseva computerized pahani for the fasli year 1427

Ex.A-5 is Meeseva computerized pahani for the fasli year 1427

JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE

CHINNUR.

CC/352/2016 Acquitted

State of TS through SI of Police ,Chennur vs Peddapalli Bhaskar

09 Mar 2019

1 CC No.352 of 2016

IN THE COURT OF THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS AT

CHINNOOR

PRESENT: Sri.G.Uday Bhaskar Rao,

Judicial Magistrate of First Class,

Chinnoor.

SATURDAY THE 9TH DAY OF MARCH,2019

C.C No.352 OF 2016

Between:-

The State through the Sub-Inspector of Police, P.S.Chennur (Cr.No.115/2016). … Complainant // AND //

Peddapalli Bhasker, S/o Ankulu, Age: 26 yrs, Caste: Bestha, Occ: Caste Profession, R/o Nallgonda Pochamawada, Chennur village

... Accused

This case is coming on 01-03-2019 for final hearing before me in the presence of Learned A.P.P. for the State-complainant and in the presence of Sri.M. Karthik Kumar Advocate, counsel for accused having been heard and having stood over for consideration till this day, the Court delivered the following:-

: J U D G M E N T :

The Sub-Inspector of police, PS Chennur filed charge sheet against the accused in Cr.No115/2016 of PS Chennur for the offence punishable under section 326,506,290 IPC.

2.The brief facts of the case as per charge sheet are as follows :-

On 10-06-2016 at 1200 hours the complainant/Gotte Laxmi, W/o

Ramaswamy, R/o Nallagonda Pochammawada, Chennur came to PS and lodged a Telugu written petition stating that, since 6 months her younger brother Peddapalli Bhasker, s/o Ankulu r/o Nallgonda Pochammawada,

Chennur village is picked up quarrel with complainant by alleging that the complainant and her husband are sorcerers. On 4-06-2016 at about 1100 hours in absence of her husband while she standing on the steps of her house her younger brother has came and dragged her from the steps by 2 CC No.352 of 2016 holding her hair and beat with broom on leg, as resulting her leg was swelled and painy. On 8-06-2016 when she consulting with the medical officer she came sight that her leg was fractured. Due to relationship she did not made complainant against brother. On 09-06-2016 at about 0700 hours , her younger brother, and one Gummula Pochaiah are went outside on motor cycle and got alcohol and fell down from motor cycle, for which her younger brother suspected that she got sorceries to him as he fell down from motor cycle and abused her in filthy language and threatened with dire consequences. Basing on the report, LW9 registered a Case in

Cr.No. 115/2016, U/sec 326,290,506 IPC. During the course of investigation

LW9 examined the LW1 and recorded his statement and visited the scene of offence at Nallagonda Pochamawada, Chennur Village and conducted scene of offence panchanama and drawn rough sketch. LW8, MO who treated the

LW1 and issued MC. On 22-06-2016 at 1330 hours reliable information the

LW9 rushed to Nallagonda Pochammawad and apprehended the accused. On interrogation he voluntarily admitted his guilt to have commit this offence.

Accused was arrested and released on personal bail by taking sureties. After completion of investigation he laid charge sheet before this Honorable court.

Hence the charge sheet.

3.This case was taken on file for the offence under Section 326,506,290

IPC and summons was ordered to the accused.

4.On appearance of the accused, copies of case documents was furnished to her in accordance with Section 207 Cr.P.C.

5.Subsequently accused was examined under section 239 of Cr.P.C., by explaining the substances of accusation for the offence under 326,506,290

IPC in Telugu to which she pleaded guilty and claimed to tried.

6.During the course of trial, prosecution has examined PW-1 and 3 CC No.352 of 2016

Ex.P-1and Ex. P-2 are marked .

7.After examining the PW1, after closer of prosecution side evidence the accused was examined under section 313 Cr.P.C. The accused denied the incriminating material found against them in the evidence of prose and reported no defense evidence.

8. Heard the arguments and perused the material on record.

9. Now the Point for determination.

10. Whether the prosecution has proved the not guilt of the

accused beyond reasonable doubt for the offence 326,506,290 IPC?

11.In this case prosecution examined PW1 and Ex P1 and Ex P2 are marked. PW1 deposed that, she did not lodged any complaint and no one beat her. There is no quarrel between accused and PW1. PW1 turned hostile. The prosecution given up the evidence of LW2 to LW9, hence their evidence is closed. There is no evidence to attract the offence U/S 326,290,506 IPC. Hence considering the same the prosecution as fail to prove the case beyond all reasonable doubts.

12. In the result,the accused is found not guilty for the offence punishable under section 326,506,290 IPC and accused person is acquitted for the same under section 248(1) Cr.P.C. The bail bonds of the accused is shall stands canceled. No case property.

Dictated to the Steno, transcribed by him and after correction, pronounced by

me in the open Court on this the 9th day of March, 2019.

JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF I CLASS

CHINNUR

4 CC No.352 of 2016

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

WITNESS EXAMINED

For the Prosecution For the Defence

PW-1: G. Laxmi/Complainant- NIL -

EXHIBITS MARKED

For Prosecution: For defence

Ex.P-1:Signature on complaint by PW1 - Nil- Ex.P-2:161 CrPC statement of PW1

MATERIAL OBJECTS

-NIL-

JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF I CLASS

CHINNUR

5 CC No.352 of 2016

CALENDER AND JUDGMENT

IN THE COURT OF THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS AT CHINNOOR.

CC No.303/2016

1.Date of offence30-06-2016 2.Date of 02-07-2016 Report/Complaint

3.Date of Apprehension 20-07-2016 of Accused

4.Date of Released on 20-07-2016 Bail of Accused 5.Date of 04-07-2018 Commencement of Trial Date Date of Closure of Trial623-08-2018

7.Date of Sentence/Order28-08-2018

8.Explanation for Delay--

9.Remarks--

10.Name of Complainant State of A.P. Through PS Kotapally

11.Name of the accused Kaveri Shankar, S/o Mallaiah, Age: 45yrs, Caste:Nethakani,Occ: Coolie, R/o Ravulapally village of Kotapally Mandal

12.Offence Under U/s. 290,324 of IPC Section(s)

13.Finding of the CourtFound not guilty

14.Sentence/order

In the result, the accused is found not guilty for the offence punishable under section 290,324 IPC and accused is acquitted for the same under section 248(1) Cr.P.C. The bail bonds of the accused is shall stands canceled. No case property.

JUDL.MAGISTRATE OF I CLASS

CHENNUR

6 CC No.352 of 2016

OS/78/2018

Kinnera Raju vs Vskadari Rajesham

26 Feb 2019

IN THE COURT OF THE JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE :AT: CHINNOOR.

PRESENT: Sri. G.Uday Bhasker Rao

Junior Civil Judge, Chennur.

Tuesday the 26th day of February, 2019

OS.No.78 OF 2018.

Between:-

Kinnera Raju, W/o Late Rajaiah, Age: 60 yrs, Occ: Agriculture & House wife, r/o H.No. 22-102, Chunnambattiwada, Mancherial, Dist Mancherial … Plaintiff // AND //

1) Kadari Rajesham, S/o Induru, Age: 48 yrs, Occ: Agriculture,

2) Kadari Ramesh, S/o Induru, Age: 43 yrs, Occ: Agriculture,

Both are r/o SC Colony, Bheemaram village and Mandal and Dist: Mancherial.

… Defendants

This suit coming on 07-02-2019 for final hearing before me in the presence of Sri. K. Ravindar, Advocate for the Plaintiff and the defendant is set-exparte and having stood over for consideration till this day, the Court delivered the following:-

J U D G E M E N T

This is a suit filed by the plaintiff for permanent injunction restraining the defendants and their men, legal hairs and servants, executors, ect., from enters and interfering with the possession of the plaintiff over the suit land bearing Sy.No.130/2 measuring Ac.1-05 gts situated at Bheemaram village and Mandal, Dist: Mancherial TS appended herewith to the plaintiff.

2.The brief averments of the plaintiff is the absolute owner, pattedar and possessor of the suit land bearing No. 130/2 measuring Ac. 1-05 gts situated at Bheemaram village and Mandal. Plaintiff inherited the property from her husband Kinnera Rajaiah and he was died 1989, since then the Plaintiff is cultivating the above said land. The revenue authorities also incorporated the name of the plaintiff and issued pattedar pass book and title deed pass book and Form No. 1B to the plaintiff. That the plaintiff is in peaceful possession and enjoyment over 2 the suit land without any interference from anybody since from the date of inheritance till today. The plaintiff also raised paddy crop in the suit schedule land at present. The defendants had no manner of right over the suit land and falsely trying to disturb the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the plaintiff with the help of his henchmen and local political leaders as the suit land become very valuable. The defendants with an ill-motive hatched a plan to occupy the suit schedule property and in pursuance of their illegal desire, the defendants along with their henchmen tried to trespassed into the suit land and damage the paddy crop on 02-09-2018, the plaintiff resisted the illegal acts of the defendants timely with the help of neighboring land owners, while leaving the suit schedule property the defendants openly declare that they will come again and dispossess the plaintiff and occupy the suit schedule land. Plaintiff is old aged widow and she is residing at

Mancherial, as such she is unable to protect the suit land without the aid and assistance of the Hon’ble Court. Hence prays to grant permanent injunction.

3-The defendants had received summons and he did not chose to filed Written Statement hence. Hence on 04-01-2019 this court set- exparte against defendant.

4-To substantiate the case of the plaintiff, the plaintiff himself examined as PW1. Ex.A1 to Ex.A10 marked on behalf of plaintiff.

5-Heard the learned counsel for the plaintiff.

Now the point for determination is :

1. Whether the plaintiff is entitled for the relief for

permanent injunction as prayed for ?.

2. If so, to what relief.

6-The plaintiff No.1 examined himself as PW1, he reiterated the contents of plaint in his chief Ex.A1 to Ex.A10 are marked. Perused the document filed by PW-1 i.e. Ex.A1 to A10 marked, i.e., Ex.A-1 is Pattedar

Pass Book, Ex.A-2 is Tax Receipt, Ex.A-3 is Form No.1B certificate, Ex.A-4 is Computerised pahani for the year fasli 1427,Ex.A-5 is Pahani for the year 1999-2000, Ex.A-6 is Pahani for the year 2001-2002,Ex.A-7 is

Pahani for the year 2003-2004,Ex.A-8 is Pahani for the year 2005- 2006,Ex.A-9 is Pahani for the year 2006-2007,Ex.A-10 is Pahani for the year 2009-2010, the Exhibits are reflects the plaintiff is owner and 3 possessor of the suit schedule land on date of filling of the suit. There is no rebuttal evidence by the defendant to disbelieve the oral and documentary evidence adduced by the plaintiff since the defendant was set ex-parte. In these circumstances the plaintiff has proved his case that he is in possession over suit land as on the filling of the suit. Hence this issue is decided in favour of plaintiff.

ISSUE No.II:

7-The issue No.1 is decided in favour of plaintiff. This issue is also decided in favour of plaintiff.

8-In The result: the suit of the plaintiff is decreed, plaintiff is here by granted permanent injunction restraining the defendant, his men from interfering with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of plaintiff over the suit schedule property.

Dictated to Steno, corrected and pronounced by me in the open Court on

this the 26th day of February, 2019.

JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE

CHINNUR.

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

WITNESSES EXAMINED

FOR PLAINTIFFS: FOR DEFENDANTS:

PW-1:Kinnera Raju-NIL-

EXHIBITS MARKED

FOR PLAINTIFFS: FOR DEFENDANTS:

Ex.A-1is Pattedar Pass Book-NIL-

Ex.A-2 is Tax Receipt Ex.A-3 is Form No.1B certificate

Ex.A-4 is Computerised pahani for the year fasli 1427 Ex.A-5 is Pahani for the year 1999-2000

Ex.A-6 is Pahani for the year 2001-2002 Ex.A-7 is Pahani for the year 2003-2004

Ex.A-8 is Pahani for the year 2005-2006 Ex.A-9 is Pahani for the year 2006-2007

Ex.A-10 is Pahani for the year 2009-2010

JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE

CHINNUR.

CC/52/2016 Acquitted

State of A.P through Police, P.S Chinnur vs Nakka Punnam

26 Feb 2019

1 CC No.52 of 2016

IN THE COURT OF THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS AT

CHINNOOR

PRESENT: Sri.G.Uday Bhaskar Rao,

Judicial Magistrate of First Class,

Chinnoor.

TUESDAY THE 26TH DAY OF FEBRUARY,2019

C.C No.52 OF 2016

Between:-

The State through the Sub-Inspector of Police, P.S.Chennur (Cr.No.127/2015). … Complainant // AND //

A1. Nakka Punnam, S/o Mallaiah, Age: 35 yrs, A3. Arepalli Bondyalu, s/o Bondyalu, Age: 40yrs, A4. Damera Sammaiah, S/o Ankaiah, Age: 40 yrs, A5. Damera Venkati, S/o Ankaiah, Age: 40yrs, A6. Narige Raju, S/o Parvathalu, Age: 45 yrs, All are Occ: Agriculture, R/o Kachanapally village of Chennur Mandal

... Accused No 1, 3 to 6

This case is coming on 21-02-2019 for final hearing before me in the presence of Learned A.P.P. for the State-complainant and in the presence of Sri.P. Mallesham Goud Advocate, counsel for accused having been heard and having stood over for consideration till this day, the Court delivered the following:-

: J U D G M E N T :

The Sub-Inspector of police, PS Chennur filed charge sheet against the accused in Cr.No.127/2015 of PS Chennur for the offence punishable under section 447,427,506 r/w 34 IPC.

2.The brief facts of the case as per charge sheet are as follows :-

On 08-08-2015 at 0830 hours while the ASI 1291 was SHO In the PS and attending the PS routine received a complainant from Challa Rajendar,

S/o Sammireddy, R/o Kamaripally village in which the complainant stating that, the complainant is the owners and possessors of the land in Sy.No. 543 to an extent of Ac. 05-36 gts situated at Gangarma Village and they are in peaceful possession and enjoying the fruits of the agriculture land for a quite 2 CC No.52 of 2016 long period. On 05-07-2015 at 0830 hours the accused persons were illegally trespassed into the complainant’s land and damaged the cotton crop and they threatened the complainant’s with dire consequences.

Basing on the above contents the LW13 has registered a case in Cr.No.

127/2015, u/sec 447,427,506 r/w 34 IPC. LW14 took up the further investigation into this case, during the course of the investigation, the LW14 visited the scene of offense and examined and recorded their statements and drawn the rough sketch. On 19-11-2015 at 1000 hours the LW14 proceeded to Kachanapally village and apprehended the Accused persons.

During the course of interrogation the accused were voluntarily confessed their guilty to had committed this offence. Accused were arrested and released on personal bail by taking sureties. After completion of investigation he laid charge sheet before this Honorable court. Hence the charge sheet.

3.This case was taken on file for the offence under Section 447,427,506 r/w 34 IPC and summons were ordered to the accused No 1 , 3 to 6.

4.On appearance of the accused No1, 3 to 6 copies of case documents were furnished to her in accordance with Section 207 Cr.P.C.

5.Subsequently accused persons were examined under section 251 of

Cr.P.C., by explaining the substances of accusation for the offence under 447,427,506 r/w 34 IPC in Telugu to which she pleaded guilty and claimed to tried.

6.During the course of trial, prosecution has examined PW-1 and PW2, and Ex.P-1 to Ex P3 are marked .

7.After examining the PW1 and PW2, after closer of prosecution side evidence the accused No 1, 3 to 6 examined under section 313 Cr.P.C. The 3 CC No.52 of 2016 accused No 1, 3 to 6 denied the incriminating material found against them in the evidence of prose and reported no defense evidence.

8. Heard the arguments and perused the material on record.

9. Now the Point for determination.

10. Whether the prosecution has proved the not guilt of the

accused beyond reasonable doubt for the offence 447,427,506 r/w

34 IPC?

11.In this case prosecution examined PW1 and PW2 and Ex P1 to Ex P3 are marked. PW1 deposed that, he did not lodged any complainant they compromised out side the court. PW2 is deposed in the lines of PW1. PW1 and PW2 are turned hostile. The parties right had compromised the case out side court, which made them to depose in this way. There is also no evidence to attract the offence U/S 447, 427, 506 r/w 34 IPC. Hence the prosecution fail to prove the case beyond all reasonable doubts.

12. In the result,the accused persons are found not guilty for the offence punishable under section 447,427,506 r/w 34 IPC and accused persons are acquitted for the same under section 255(1) Cr.P.C. The bail bonds of the accused is shall stands canceled. No case property.

Dictated to the Steno, transcribed by him and after correction, pronounced by

me in the open Court on this the 26th day of February, 2019.

JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF I CLASS

CHINNUR

4 CC No.52 of 2016

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

WITNESS EXAMINED

For the Prosecution For the Defence

PW-1: Challa Rajendar/Complainant- NIL - PW-2: Challa Bhaskar Reddy/Circumstantial witnesses

EXHIBITS MARKED

For Prosecution: For defence

Ex.P-1:Signature on complaint by PW1 - Nil- Ex.P-2:161 CrPC statement of PW1 Ex.P-3:161 CrPC statement of PW2

MATERIAL OBJECTS

-NIL-

JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF I CLASS

CHINNUR

5 CC No.52 of 2016 6 CC No.52 of 2016

OS/50/2018

Parasaboyina Chataiah vs Munjam Posham and one another

26 Feb 2019

IN THE COURT OF THE JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE :AT: CHINNOOR.

PRESENT: Sri. G.Uday Bhasker Rao

Junior Civil Judge, Chennur.

Tuesday the 26th day of February, 2019

OS.No.50 OF 2018.

Between:-

Parashaboina Chattaiah, S/o Gundaiah, Age: 60yrs, Occ: Coolie, R/o H.No. 3-61, Laxmipur village, Manthani Mandal. Peddapalli District.

… Plaintiff // AND //

1) Munjam Posham, S/o Ankaiah, Age:35 yrs, R/o Nagampet, Kotapalli Mandal, Mancherial District

2) Munjam Ankaiah, S/o Muttaiah, Age:75 yrs, R/o Nagampet, Kotapalli Mandal, Mancherial District … Defendants

This suit coming on 14-02-2019 for final hearing before me in the presence of Sri.Erikilla Narasaiah and Seggem Ramesh, Advocates for the Plaintiff and the defendants is set-exparte and having stood over for consideration till this day, the Court delivered the following:-

J U D G E M E N T

This is a suit filed by the plaintiff for perpectual injunction restraining the defendants and their men, legal hairs and servants, executors, ect., from enters and interfering with the possession of the plaintiff over the suit land bearing Sy.No.172 measuring Ac.0-24 gts situated at Nagampet Shivar of Kotapally Mandal, Dist: Mancherial TS appended herewith to the plaintiff.

2.The brief averments of the plaintiff is the absolute owner, pattedar and possessor of the suit land bearing No. 172 measuring Ac. 0-24gts situated at Nagampet Shivar of Kotapally Mandal the suit property inherited from his father, after the plaintiff became as pattedar, possessor and enjoyment of th suit land. The plaintiff cultivating the suit land with out any interruption from anybody from any sort. Defendant

No 1 is influenced person, with his influence he entered the Defendant

No 2 name in the Revenue Records as occupant column, the plaintiff 2 reported to the concerned Thahasildhar for delete the Defendant No 2 name from the records, in the month of March. June first week, 2018 the

Defendant no 1 and his henchmen without having any right over the suit property entered in to the suit land and tried to occupy the suit land forcibly by disposing the plaintiff and his family. The plaintiff have not available always at the suit land because of the plaintiff residing far to the village, as such the defendants have chance to occupy the suit land with the absence of the plaintiff. The plaintiff filing the relevant documents. The plaintiff understood that he can’t protect his legitimate rights and possession over the suit land from the illegal attempts by the defendants. Hence prays to grant perpectual injunction.

3-The defendants had received summons and he did not chose to filed Written Statement hence. Hence on 23-01-2019 this court set- exparte against defendant.

4-To substantiate the case of the plaintiff, the plaintiff himself examined as PW1. Ex.A1 and Ex.A2 marked on behalf of plaintiff.

5-Heard the learned counsel for the plaintiff.

Now the point for determination is :

1. Whether the plaintiff is entitled for the relief for

perpectual injunction as prayed for ?.

2. If so, to what relief.

6-The plaintiff No.1 examined himself as PW1, he reiterated the contents of plaint in his chief Ex.A1 and Ex.A2 are marked. Perused the document filed by PW-1 i.e. Ex.A1 and Ex. A2 marked, i.e., Ex.A-1 is CC of Original Pahani for the year 1427 fasli, Ex.A-2 is CC of Original Pahani for the year 1426 fasli the Exhibits are reflects the plaintiff is owner and possessor of the suit schedule land on date of filling of the suit. There is no rebuttal evidence by the defendant to disbelieve the oral and documentary evidence adduced by the plaintiff since the defendant was set ex-parte. In these circumstances the plaintiff has proved his case that he is in possession over suit land as on the filling of the suit. Hence this issue is decided in favour of plaintiff.

ISSUE No.II:

7-The issue No.1 is decided in favour of plaintiff. This issue is also decided in favour of plaintiff.

3 8-In The result: the suit of the plaintiff is decreed, plaintiff is here by granted perpetual injunction restraining the defendants, their men from interfering with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of plaintiff over the suit schedule property.

Dictated to Steno, corrected and pronounced by me in the open Court on

this the 26th day of February, 2019.

JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE

CHINNUR.

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

WITNESSES EXAMINED

FOR PLAINTIFFS: FOR DEFENDANTS:

PW-1:Parashaboina Chattaiah-NIL-

EXHIBITS MARKED

FOR PLAINTIFFS: FOR DEFENDANTS:

Ex.A-1 is CC of Original Pahani for the year 1427 fasli Ex.A-2 is CC of Original Pahani for the year 1426 fasli

JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE

CHINNUR.

Order Record 1,623 total

Case No.	Parties	Date	Type	Outcome
EP/1/2017	Thota Satyanarayana vs Thota Shanta	09 Mar 2019	Order	—
EP/1/2018	Latti Rajababu vs Saidala Nagesh	09 Mar 2019	Order	—
OS/18/2017	Jamboji Sai Krishna vs Morla Chandu	09 Mar 2019	Order	—
OS/29/2018	Matta Mahendar Reddy vs Srinivas Rao	09 Mar 2019	Order	—
CC/3/2019	State of Telangana through SI of Police, Kotapally vs Gaddam Venkati	09 Mar 2019	Order	—
CC/4/2019	State of Telangana through SI of Police, Kotapally vs Korthe Pochaiah	09 Mar 2019	Order	—
CC/7/2019	State of Telangana through SI of Police, Kotapally vs Durgma Gangaiah	09 Mar 2019	Order	—
CC/14/2019	SHO CHENNUR vs ANGA PULLAIAH	09 Mar 2019	Order	—
CC/15/2019	SHO JAIPUR vs JETTI RAMESH	09 Mar 2019	Order	—
CC/22/2019	SHO Bheemaram vs Adepu Rajkumar	09 Mar 2019	Order	—
CC/23/2019	SHO Jaipur vs Donthula Ravi	09 Mar 2019	Order	—
CC/24/2019	SHO Jaipur vs Kurmila Banesh	09 Mar 2019	Order	—
CC/25/2019	SHO Jaipur vs Chopari Narshaiah @ Narsimulu	09 Mar 2019	Order	—
CC/26/2019	SHO Jaipur vs Ejjagiri Nagesh	09 Mar 2019	Order	—
CC/27/2019	SHO jaipur vs Engandula Ramesh	09 Mar 2019	Order	—
CC/29/2017	The State of TS Through SI of Police,PS Chennur vs A2. Aitha Sammireddy	09 Mar 2019	Order	—
CC/30/2018	station House Officer Chennur vs Mekala Mahendar	09 Mar 2019	Order	—
CC/33/2019	SHO Chennur vs Pannala Srinivas	09 Mar 2019	Order	—
CC/35/2019	SHO Chennur vs Thalapalli Kiran	09 Mar 2019	Order	—
CC/36/2018	station House Officer Jaipur vs Salluri Bheemaiah	09 Mar 2019	Order	—
CC/36/2019	SHO Chennur vs Masham Venkatesh	09 Mar 2019	Order	—
CC/40/2018	SHO Jaipur vs Mohd @ Sayad Azgar and one another	09 Mar 2019	Order	—
CC/40/2019	SHO Neelwai vs Syed Hazar Ali @ Syed Hassan Ali	09 Mar 2019	Order	—
CC/43/2019	SHO Chennur vs Madasu Venkatesh @ Bapu	09 Mar 2019	Order	—
CC/48/2019	SHO Chennur vs Ponnam Vivek	09 Mar 2019	Order	—
CC/49/2019	SHO Chennur vs Madasu Pushpalatha	09 Mar 2019	Order	—
CC/51/2019	SHO Chennur vs Joguru laxmi	09 Mar 2019	Order	—
CC/52/2019	SHO Chennur vs Gadavena Nagaraju	09 Mar 2019	Order	—
CC/69/2019	SHO KOTAPALLY vs SODARI SUDHARSHAN	09 Mar 2019	Order	—
CC/70/2019	SHO Kotapally vs Durgam Ramdev	09 Mar 2019	Order	—
CC/76/2019	SHO Bheemaram vs Rajarapu Sadandam	09 Mar 2019	Order	—
CC/77/2019	SHO Bheemaram vs Adicherla Gattaiah	09 Mar 2019	Order	—
CC/78/2019	SHo Bheemaram vs Botka Bapu	09 Mar 2019	Order	—
CC/79/2019	SHo Bheemaram vs Kumpedam Sumalatha	09 Mar 2019	Order	—
CC/81/2019	SHO Chennur vs Bommidi Naveen	09 Mar 2019	Order	—
CC/82/2019	SHO Chennur vs Kammagoni Sammaiah	09 Mar 2019	Order	—
CC/84/2019	SHO Chennur vs Marapaka Raju	09 Mar 2019	Order	—
CC/85/2019	SHO CHENNUR vs Md.Jaleel	09 Mar 2019	Order	—
CC/89/2019	SHO Chennur vs Khaja Riazoddin	09 Mar 2019	Order	—
CC/92/2019	SHO Jaipur vs Abdul Rasheed	09 Mar 2019	Order	—
CC/93/2019	SHO Jaipur vs Vyshakha Thirupathi	09 Mar 2019	Order	—
CC/95/2019	SHo Jaipur vs Boppa Swarupa	09 Mar 2019	Order	—
CC/102/2019	SHO Bheemaram vs Ramlkhan sing	09 Mar 2019	Order	—
CC/103/2019	SHO CHENNUR vs SK SHAKIR	09 Mar 2019	Order	—
CC/104/2019	SHO CHENNUR vs Uppala Sathish	09 Mar 2019	Order	—
CC/106/2019	SHO BHEEMARAM vs Vsnitturi punnam	09 Mar 2019	Order	—
CC/115/2017	The SHO,PS,Kotapally vs Kundarapu Nagesh	09 Mar 2019	Order	—
CC/122/2017	The SHO PS,Bheemaram vs Kolakani Arjaiah	09 Mar 2019	Order	—
CC/211/2018	SHO Neelwai vs Gandrakota Mallaiah	09 Mar 2019	Order	—
CC/213/2018	SHo Neelwai vs Vsjillapally Lingaiah and one another	09 Mar 2019	Order	—
CC/214/2018	SHO Bheemaram vs Polam Rajanna and five others	09 Mar 2019	Order	—
CC/219/2018	SHO Bheemaram vs Durgam thirupathi	09 Mar 2019	Order	—
CC/223/2017	station House Officer PS Kotapally vs Chityala Gouramma	09 Mar 2019	Order	—
CC/232/2018	SHO Kotapally vs Godari Ramaiah and one another	09 Mar 2019	Order	—
CC/267/2018	SHO Bheemaram vs Dasari Ramesh and six others	09 Mar 2019	Order	—
CC/308/2017	station House Officer Chennur vs Mangapalli srinivas	09 Mar 2019	Order	—
CC/331/2017	Jadala Sathyanarayana vs Karengula Rajanna	09 Mar 2019	Order	—
CC/339/2017	station House Officer Neelwai vs Dobbala Pochaiah @ LIC Pocham	09 Mar 2019	Order	—
CC/349/2018	SHO CHENNUR vs Tekam Ellaiah	09 Mar 2019	Order	—
CC/352/2016	State of TS through SI of Police ,Chennur vs Peddapalli Bhaskar	09 Mar 2019	Judgment	Acquitted
CC/366/2018	SHO CHENNUR vs Nitturi Prabhakar	09 Mar 2019	Order	—
CC/367/2018	SHO CHENNUR vs Polam Kistaiah	09 Mar 2019	Order	—
CC/372/2017	station House Officer Jaipur vs Macharla Ravi Kumar	09 Mar 2019	Order	—
CC/386/2018	SHO NEELWAI vs ENUGANTI SATYANARAYANA	09 Mar 2019	Order	—
CC/402/2018	SHO BHEEMARAM vs Bonthala Lingaiah	09 Mar 2019	Order	—
CC/407/2018	SHO NEELWAI vs DEVANABOINA SHANKAR	09 Mar 2019	Order	—
CC/408/2018	SHO KOTAPALLY vs Sunkari Shyamala	09 Mar 2019	Order	—
CC/410/2018	SHO Kotapally vs Neela Kaladhar	09 Mar 2019	Order	—
STC/14/2019	SHO BHEEMARAM vs PONNALA PRASHANTH	09 Mar 2019	Order	—
STC/15/2019	SHO JAIPUR vs Bollapalli Srinivas goud	09 Mar 2019	Order	—
STC/16/2019	SHO Nelwai vs Puppiredy Ramreddy	09 Mar 2019	Order	—
STC/17/2019	SHO Kotapally vs Kompally Rajaposham	09 Mar 2019	Order	—
STC/18/2019	SHO Kotapally vs Salpala Pullakka	09 Mar 2019	Order	—
STC/19/2019	SHO Kotapally vs Oddi Madhukar	09 Mar 2019	Order	—
STC/20/2019	SHO PS Neelwai vs Pandula AShok	09 Mar 2019	Order	—
STC/21/2019	SHO Kotapally vs Gaddam Pradeep	09 Mar 2019	Order	—
STC/22/2019	SHOKotapally vs Kammala Santhosh	09 Mar 2019	Order	—
STC/23/2019	SHO Bheemaram vs Jadi Ashok	09 Mar 2019	Order	—
STC/24/2019	SHO BHEEMARAM vs VIDYA SAGAR BANOTH	09 Mar 2019	Order	—
STC/25/2019	SHO Kotapally vs Purella Mahesh	09 Mar 2019	Order	—
STC/26/2019	SHo Kotapally vs Kukkala Chinna Chandraiah	09 Mar 2019	Order	—
STC/27/2019	SHo Neelwai vs Lingamapally Venkati	09 Mar 2019	Order	—
STC/28/2019	SHO Neelwai vs Jadugulla Gangakka	09 Mar 2019	Order	—
STC/29/2019	SHO Neelwai vs Jadugula Madunakka	09 Mar 2019	Order	—
STC/30/2019	SHO PS KOTAPALLY vs Sunkari Thirupathi	09 Mar 2019	Order	—
STC/50/2013	Labour Enforecement officer,Jyothi nagar,ramagunda vs S.PALLAM RAJU AND 3OTHERS	09 Mar 2019	Order	—
STC/58/2013	Labour Enforecement officer,Jyothi nagar,ramagunda vs S.PALLAM RAJU AND 1 OTHERS	09 Mar 2019	Order	—
STC/62/2013	Labour Enforecement officer,Jyothi nagar,ramagunda vs S.PALLAM RAJU AND 1 OTHERS	09 Mar 2019	Order	—
STC/503/2019	SHO CHENNUR vs Arimadla Thirupathi	09 Mar 2019	Order	—
STC/537/2019	SHO BHEEMARAM vs GAJJALA SURESH	09 Mar 2019	Order	—
STC/538/2019	SHO NEELWAI vs ADAPA NARSIMULU	09 Mar 2019	Order	—
STC/539/2019	SHO CHENNUR vs MADASU SUNIL KUMAR	09 Mar 2019	Order	—
STC/540/2019	SHO BHEEMARAM vs RAJANNA ATTELA	09 Mar 2019	Order	—
STC/541/2019	SHO BHEEMARAM vs ANGADI SRINIVAS	09 Mar 2019	Order	—
STC/542/2019	SHO CHENNUR vs MD Salam	09 Mar 2019	Order	—
STC/543/2019	SHO CHENNUR vs ASAMPELLI SRIKANTH	09 Mar 2019	Order	—
STC/544/2019	SHO BHEEMARAM vs Praveen Chinthala	09 Mar 2019	Order	—
STC/545/2019	SHO BHEEMARAM vs EDLA SRINIVAS	09 Mar 2019	Order	—
STC/546/2019	SHO CHENNUR vs LAXMAN POLAVENI	09 Mar 2019	Order	—
STC/547/2019	SHO CHENNUR vs DURGAM PREM	09 Mar 2019	Order	—

Showing 100 of 1,623 orders — Log in to browse all pages.

Monthly Orders (Last 12 Months)

Mar 2019		218
Feb 2019		10
Jan 2019		18
Dec 2018		91
Nov 2018		16
Oct 2018		7
Sep 2018		142
Aug 2018		29
Jul 2018		252
Jun 2018		22
May 2018		43
Apr 2018		70

Frequently Asked Questions

How many cases has Sri. G. Uday Bhasker Rao handled?

Sri. G. Uday Bhasker Rao has handled 1659 court orders since 2017 at Mancherial, SCJ Court Complex. The average disposal rate is 32 orders per month.

What types of cases does Sri. G. Uday Bhasker Rao hear?

Based on available records, Sri. G. Uday Bhasker Rao primarily handles Criminal matters (Criminal Cases, Summary Trial Cases) and Civil matters (Original Suits, Execution Petitions) at Mancherial, SCJ Court Complex.

Where is Sri. G. Uday Bhasker Rao currently posted?

Sri. G. Uday Bhasker Rao is posted as Prl. Senior Civil Judge-cum-Asst.Sessions Judge at Mancherial, SCJ Court Complex, Mancherial, Telangana.

Are judgments by Sri. G. Uday Bhasker Rao available online?

Yes. 5 judgments by Sri. G. Uday Bhasker Rao are available on Legistro with full text, outcome, and sections cited.

How fast does Sri. G. Uday Bhasker Rao dispose cases?

Sri. G. Uday Bhasker Rao disposes approximately 32 cases per month, based on 1659 orders handled over their tenure at Mancherial, SCJ Court Complex.

Since when is Sri. G. Uday Bhasker Rao serving?

Sri. G. Uday Bhasker Rao has been serving at Mancherial, SCJ Court Complex since 2017.

Case Types

CC 57%

STC 27%

OS 7%

PRC 6%

DVC 2%

EP 1%

OP 0%

PLC 0%

Posting History

Aug 2021 — Sep 2021

Prl. Senior Civil Judge-cum-Asst.Sessions Judge
May 2017 — Mar 2019

Junior Civil Judge / JFCM Chennur · 1,659 orders

Outcomes on Record

Acquitted 2

Other Judges at this Court

Smt. G.Kavitha

Prl. Junior Civil Judge

884 orders

Ms K. Nirosha

II Addl. Junior Civil Judge

0 orders

Smt. Angadi Nirmala

Prl. Senior Civil Judge-cum-Asst.Sessions Judge

211 orders

Sri. D.Rama Mohan Reddy

Addl Senior Civil Judge-cum-AsstSessions Judge

304 orders

← View all judges at Mancherial, SCJ Court Complex