Sri K. Srikanth

1 of 9 OS No.928 of 2025 PJCJ-cum-IV AJMFC.

IN THE COURT OF THE PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE-CUM-

IV ADDL. JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS,

MEDCHAL-MALKAJGIRI, UPPAL AT LB NAGAR.

Present: SRI K. SRIKANTH Prl.Junior Civil Judge-cum IV Addl. Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Medchal-Malkajgiri District, Uppal at LB Nagar.

Wednesday, the 31 stof December, 2025.

Original Suit No.928 of 2025

Between:

1). Smt. Gunta Sujatha W/o.Late Gunta Senvarma Aged 45 years, Occ: Nursing Warden R/o H.No. 10-101/202, Chilukuri Nilayam, Om Vihar Colony, Medipally, Ranga Reddy District – 500 039.

2). Gunta Devharsh S/o Late Gunta Senvarma Aged 22 years, Occ: Student, R/o.H.No. 10-101/202, Chilukuri Nilayam, Om Vihar Colony, Medipally, Ranga Reddy District – 500 039.

3). Gunta Jetin Sai S/o.Late Gunta Senvarma Aged 18 years, Occ: Student, R/o H.No.10-101/202, Chilukuri Nilayam, Om Vihar Colony, Medipally, Ranga Reddy District – 500 039. ……….Plaintiffs. AND 1). The Tahsildar, Medipally Mandal, Medchal - Malkajgiri District 2). All Concerned ……….Defendants.

2 of 9 OS No.928 of 2025 PJCJ-cum-IV AJMFC.

This suit is coming before me for final hearing in the presence of M/s.T.V.Yashasri Arun Bhargav, learned counsel for the plaintiffs and defendants are exparte andupon perusing the material papers on record, upon hearing the arguments of plaintiffs side and the matter having stood over for consideration till this day, the court delivered the following:

JUDGMENT

[1]. This suit is filed by the plaintiffs to declare them as legal heirs of deceased Late Gunta Senvarma, who expired on 10.10.2019, and direct the defendant No.1 to issue a legal heir certificate in their favour for the estate and assets of the deceased, including the property at H.No. 10-101/202, Chilukuri Nilayam, Om Vihar Colony,

Medipally, Uppal, bearing PTIN: 1198013278.

[2]. The case of the plaintiffs, in brief, is follows:

i) The plaintiffs are the only surviving legal heirs of

Late Gunta Senvarma, who expired on 10.10.2019 at Krishna

Institute of Medical Sciences, Secunderabad. The death is duly registered with the Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation under

Form No.6 and the plaintiffs continue to reside at the same address as the deceased. The deceased Gunta Senvarma was the absolute owner and possessor of flat No.202, 2nd floor, 800 SFT, East facing, in the building known as ‘Chilukuri Nilayam’ H.No.10-101, Om

Vihar Colony, Medipally, Uppal, K.V. Rangareddy, Telangana, 500 3 of 9 OS No.928 of 2025 PJCJ-cum-IV AJMFC.

039. The property was acquired under sale deed bearing document

No.5599 of 2010, SRO Uppal, dated 30.07.2010.

2). The plaintiffs as Class-I heirs under Section 8 of the

Hindu Succession Act, 1956, approached the defendant No.1 on 15.03.2025 for issuance of a legal heir certificate, submitting all required documents including the death certificate, Aadhaar cards, and property tax receipts. However, the request was refused on the ground that the deceased was not a Government employee and the plaintiffs were advised to seek a judicial declaration.

3). The plaintiffs have been in continuous, peaceful possession and enjoyment of the schedule property since the demise of the deceased. They have been paying property taxes and maintaining the property without any interruption or adverse claim from any third party. The plaintiffs’ right to the property is being hindered solely due to the absence of a legal heir certificate, which is required for mutation, transfer of title, and other administrative purposes. The deceased Gunta Senvarma was a law-abiding citizen, and all his assets, including the schedule property, were self- acquired. There are no other claimants or legal heirs apart from the plaintiffs. The plaintiffs have not executed relinquishment or settlement deed in favour of any third party, nor have they transferred any rights in the property to anyone else. The plaintiffs’ 4 of 9 OS No.928 of 2025 PJCJ-cum-IV AJMFC.

status as sole legal heirs is further corroborated by the family members’ details and the absence of any rival claim.

4). The plaintiffs have made several representations to the revenue authorities, including the Tahsildar, Medipally Mandal, for issuance of the legal heir certificate. Despite repeated follow-ups and submission of all necessary documents, the authorities have failed to grant the certificate, citing procedural limitations and the deceased's non-government employee status. This has caused undue hardship and delay in the plaintiffs' ability to assert their rights over the estate. The plaintiffs require the legal heir certificate for various legal and administrative purposes, including transfer of property mutation of municipal records, access to bank accounts, the insurance claims and other benefits accruing from the estate of the deceased. The absence of the certificate has resulted in the plaintiffs being unable to complete these essential formalities, thereby causing financial and legal difficulties.

5). The plaintiffs have not filed any other suit or proceeding before any court or authority for similar relief. This is the first and on a suit filed by the plaintiffs seeking a declaration of their status as legal heirs of Late Gunta Senvarma and for issuance of the legal heir certificate. The plaintiffs undertake to inform this

Court if any parallel or subsequent proceedings are initiated in the 5 of 9 OS No.928 of 2025 PJCJ-cum-IV AJMFC.

future. The plaintiffs are lawfully entitled to succeed to the estate of the deceased as per the provisions of the Hindu Succession Act.

1956. There are no impediments, legal or otherwise, to the grant of the relief sought. The plaintiffs have complied with all statutory requirements and have approached this Court only after exhausting all administrative remedies. The refusal of defendant No. 1 to issue the legal heir certificate is arbitrary, unjust, and contrary to the principles of natural justice. The plaintiffs have a legitimate right to be recognized as the legal heirs of the deceased and to obtain the necessary certificate for the protection and enjoyment of their lawful inheritance. The intervention of this Court is therefore necessary to secure the ends of justice and prevent further hardship to the plaintiffs. Hence the suit.

[3]. The defendant No.1 was set exparte on 16.09.2025 as none appeared before the court inspite of service of summons. On the same day the defendant No.2 is also set exparte as no objections received for the paper publication.

[4]. On behalf of plaintiffs, the plaintiff No.1 is examined as

PW-1 and Ex.A1 to A7 are marked.

[5]. Heard the learned counsel for the plaintiffs.

6 of 9 OS No.928 of 2025 PJCJ-cum-IV AJMFC.

[6]. Now the point for determination is “whether the suit can be decreed as prayed for”?

Point: [7]. To prove their case, the plaintiff No.1 examined as PW-1 and filed chief affidavit in lieu of her chief-examination wherein she has reiterated the averments of the plaint. On perusal of the entire material on record, Ex.A1/original death certificate of deceased

Gunta Senvarma would indicate about the death of deceased on 10.10.2019. Ex.A2 to A4 are the Aadhar cards of plaintiffs No.1 to 3 and they reflect the name of deceased Gunta Senvarma as husband of plaintiff No.1 and father of plaintiffs No.2 and 3. Further,

Ex.A7/certified copy of sale deed bearing document No.5599 of 2010

dated 30.07.2010 showing the purchase of suit flat by the deceased

and Ex.A5 and Ex.A6 would indicate that suit flat is in the name deceased Sen Varma and the plaintiffs are residents of the same and the property tax is being paid from time to time.

[8]. As per section 34 of Specific Relief Act: Any person entitled to any legal character right or status may institute a suit against any person denying or interested to deny his title to such character right or status and this court may in its discretion make a declaration that he is so entitled.

7 of 9 OS No.928 of 2025 PJCJ-cum-IV AJMFC.

[9]. From the evidence of PW-1 coupled with the documents marked as Ex.A1 to Ex.A7, plaintiffs established that the deceased

Gunta Senvarma died on 10.10.2019 and the plaintiffs are his legal heirs. The unchallenged evidence of plaintiffs both oral and documentary evidence establishes the claim of the plaintiffs as PW-1 was not cross-examined by the defendants as they remained as ex- parte. As per Ex.A1, the plaintiff is wife and as per Ex.A2 and A3, the plaintiffs No.2 and 3 are the children of deceased. Therefore, there is no dispute with regard to relationship of plaintiffs with that of deceased person.

[10]. However, the other relief of the plaintiffs that they are entitled the suit flat is concern, there is no order in respect of the rights or interest over the suit land since the suit is filed mere declaration of legal heirs and the scope of enquiry in the present suit is limited to an extent of declaring the plaintiffs as legal heirs of the deceased Gunta Senvarma, as such this Court is not inclined to give any finding in respect of the title or rights of the plaintiffs over the suit schedule property. Therefore, this Court is of the consider view that the plaintiffs are entitled for the relief of declaration to declare them as legal heirs of deceased Gunta

Senvarma only. As such, this Court is not inclined to give any 8 of 9 OS No.928 of 2025 PJCJ-cum-IV AJMFC.

finding in respect of the title or ownership of the plaintiffs over the suit flat. The point is answered accordingly.

[11]. In the result, the suit is partly decreed exparte, declaring the plaintiffs as the legal heirs of deceased

Late Sri Gunta Senvarma who died on 10.10.2019. There is no finding or order in respect of the title and ownership of the suit property. However, there is no order as to costs. IA’s pending if any stands closed.

Typed to my dictation on computer by Stenographer, corrected and

pronounced by me in the open court on this the 31 stday of December, 2025.

Prl. Junior Civil Judge -cum - IV Addl. Judicial Magistrate of First Class Medchal- Malkajgiri District, Uppal at L.B.Nagar.

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

WITNESSES EXAMINED

For plaintiffs: PW-1 : Smt. Gunta Sujatha

For defendants: None.

EXHIBITS MARKED

For plaintiffs:

Ex.A1: Copy of death certificate of late Gunta Senvarma (Form No. 6, GHMC) 9 of 9 OS No.928 of 2025 PJCJ-cum-IV AJMFC.

Ex.A2: Original Aadhar card of plaintiff No.1 (Smt. Gunta Sujatha).

Ex.A3: Original Aadhar card of plaintiff No.2 (Gunta Devharsh).

Ex.A4: Original Aadhar card of plaintiff No.3 (Gunta Jetin Sai).

Ex.A5: Property tax receipt for H.No.10-101/202, Chilukuri Nilayam.

Ex.A6:Address proof for the plaintiffs (utility bills or other relevant documents)

Ex.A7:Certified copy of sale deed bearing documentary No.5599/2010, dated 30.07.2010.

For defendants:- Nil -

Prl. Junior Civil Judge -cum - IV Addl. Judicial Magistrate of First Class Medchal- Malkajgiri District, Uppal at L.B.Nagar.

1 of 8 OS No.807 of 2025 PJCJ-cum-IV AJMFC.

IN THE COURT OF THE PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE-CUM-

IV ADDL. JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS,

MEDCHAL-MALKAJGIRI, UPPAL AT LB NAGAR.

Present: SRI K. SRIKANTH Prl.Junior Civil Judge-cum IV Addl. Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Medchal-Malkajgiri District, Uppal at LB Nagar.

Wednesday, the 07 thday of January, 2026.

Original Suit No.807 of 2025

Between:

1). Dekonda Shanker S/o Late Gangaram Aged about 57 years, Occ: Business 2). Dekonda Sriker S/o Dekonda Shanker Aged about 33 years, Occ: Pvt. Service 3). Dekonda Sindhuja D/o Dekonda Shanker Aged about 31 years, Occ: Pvt. Service

All are R/0.2-19-79/90, Balaji Enclave, Kalyanpuri, Uppal, M.M. District.………….Plaintiffs.

AND 1). Thasildar, Uppal Mandal, M.M.District, At Uppal -500 039.

2). Thasildar, Bommalramaram Mandal, Yadadri Bhongiri District, at Bommalramaram.

3). All concerned.……….Defendants.

This suit is coming before me for final hearing in the presence of Sri R.Ashok Goud, learned counsel for the plaintiffs and defendants are exparte andupon perusing the material papers on record, upon hearing the arguments of plaintiffs side and the matter having stood over for consideration till this day, the court delivered the following:

2 of 8 OS No.807 of 2025 PJCJ-cum-IV AJMFC.

JUDGMENT

[1]. This suit is filed by the plaintiffs to declare them as the legal heirs of the deceased late Dekonda Sudharani in respect of suit schedule – ‘A’ and ‘B’ properties.

[2]. The gist of the averments of the plaint is as follows:

2.1) The plaintiff No.1 is husband, plaintiffs No.2 & 3 are son and daughter of deceased late Dekonda Sudharani respectively. The deceased late Dekonda Sudharani died intestate due to ill health on 24.01.2025 at H.No.2-19-73/90, Kalyanpuri,

Uppal, M.M. District, leaving behind her, the plaintiffs as legal heirs.

2.2) The above mentioned late Dekonda Sudharani has purchased the suit schedule- ‘A’ property i.e. an open plot no.157 in

Sy.No.27 & 28 admeasuring 256 Sq yards or 214.04 Sq Mts situated at Narapally (V & G.P), Ghatkesar (M), M.M Dist., by virtue of document No.335 of 2012 dated 09.07.2012 duly registered on the file of SRO Narapally from Smt.Jengiti Prameela W/o Sri.J.Manikya

Rao, R/o.H.No.10-78/1, Prem Nagar Colony, Malkajiri, M.M Dist., and in continues and peaceful possession of the above mentioned property.

3 of 8 OS No.807 of 2025 PJCJ-cum-IV AJMFC.

2.3) The deceased late Dekonda Sudharani also purchased suit schedule – ‘B’ property i.e. an open plot No.959 in Sy

No.138, 138/ఆ , 138/ఈ, 138/లూ� , 139, 139/B/4, 139A అ, 139A/ఆ, 139B అ, 139B ఆ, 139/ఉ, 139/A ఊ, 139/A/ఊ 3, 139/B/ఇ, 139/B ఈ 3, 139/Β/ఊ 2, 139/ఈ , 140, 140A ఆ, 140/A/ఇ , 140B అ, 140/B/ఆ, 140/B/ఊ, 162 అ, 162/ఆ, 162, 163, 166 & 188/2 admeasuring 167 Sq yards or 139.6 Sq Mts situated at "Haritha Vanam", Mediapally (V&G.P),

Bomalaramaram (M), Yadadi Rhongari Dist., TS by virtue of document No.13049 of 2018 on the of SRO Bhangir, dated 27.10.2018 and in continues and peaceful possession of the above mentioned property.

2.3) The plaintiff No.1 approached the defendants No.1 & 2 for issuance of legal heir certificate on 14.04.2025, but the

Thasildar, Uppal and Thasildar, Bommalaramaram informed to obtain legal heir certificate from the Court, as such the plaintiffs

No.1 to 3 approached this Court to declare them as legal heirs of deceased late Dekonda Sudharani in respect of schedule ‘A’ & ‘B’ properties. Hence, this suit.

[3]. The defendant No.1 and 2 were set exparte on 15.09.2025 as they failed to appear before the court inspite of service of summons. As no objections received for the paper 4 of 8 OS No.807 of 2025 PJCJ-cum-IV AJMFC.

publication, the defendant No.3 is also set exparte on the same day i.e. on 15.09.2025.

[4]. On behalf of plaintiffs, the plaintiff No.1 is examined as

PW-1 and Ex.A1 to A10 are marked.

[5]. Heard the learned counsel for the plaintiffs. Perused the record.

[6]. Now the point for determination is “whether the

plaintiffs are entitled for the relief of declaration to declare

them as the legal heirs of deceased Dekonda Sudharani who

died intestate on 24.01.2025, as prayed for”?

Point: [7]. To prove their case, the plaintiff No.1 is examined as

PW-1 and filed chief affidavit in lieu of his chief-examination wherein he has reiterated the averments of the plaint. On perusal of the entire material on record, Ex.A1/death certificate of deceased

Dekonda Sudharani, which indicate about her death on 24.01.2025.

Further, PW-1 got marked Ex.A2/certified copy of registered sale deed bearing document No.3355 of 2012, dated 09.07.2012 showing that the deceased had purchased the suit schedule ‘A’ property.

PW-1 also got marked Ex.A4/certified copy of registered sale deed 5 of 8 OS No.807 of 2025 PJCJ-cum-IV AJMFC.

bearing document No.13049 of 2018, dated 27.10.2018 showing that the deceased had purchased the suit schedule ‘B’ property. The encumbrance certificates which are marked under Ex.A3 and Ex.A5 would indicate that the property is still stands in the name of deceased Dekonda Sudharani. Further, Ex.A6 to Ex.A9/Aadhar cards of plaintiffs No.1 to 3 show their identity and further reflects the name of plaintiff No.1 as father of plaintiffs No.2 and 3. Further,

Ex.A1, Ex.A2 and Ex.A4 reflect the name of plaintiff No.1 as husband of deceased.

[8]. As per section 34 of Specific Relief Act:

Any person entitled to any legal character right or status may institute a suit against any person denying or interested to deny his title to such character right or status and this court may in its discretion make a declaration that he is so entitled.

[9]. From the evidence of PW-1 coupled with the documents marked as Ex.A1 to Ex.A10, it is established that the deceased

Dekonda Sudharani died on 24.01.2025 and the plaintiffs are his legal heirs being her husband and children. The unchallenged evidence of PW-1 both oral and documentary evidence establishes the claim of the plaintiffs and moreover, PW-1 was not cross- examined by the defendants. As per the documents under Ex.A1, 6 of 8 OS No.807 of 2025 PJCJ-cum-IV AJMFC.

Ex.A6 to Ex.A8 and oral evidence of PW-1, the plaintiff No.1 and deceased Dekonda Sudharani are husband and wife and the plaintiffs No.2 and 3 are their children. Therefore, there is no dispute with regard to relationship of plaintiffs with that of deceased person.

[10]. During the proceedings, neither the defendants nor any other persons appears to deny the relationship of the plaintiffs with the deceased. However, there is no order in respect of the rights or interest over the suit schedule ‘A’ and ‘B’ properties, since the suit is filed mere declaration of legal heirs and the scope of enquiry in the present suit is limited to an extent of declaring the plaintiffs as legal heirs of the deceased, as such this court is not inclined to give any finding in respect of the title or rights of the plaintiffs over the suit schedule ‘A’ and ‘B’ properties. Therefore, this Court is of the consider view that the plaintiffs are entitled for the relief of declaration to declare them as legal heirs of deceased

Dekonda Sudharani only. The point is answered accordingly.

[11]. In the result, the suit is partly decreed exparte, declaring the plaintiffs as the legal heirs of deceased

Dekonda Sudharani W /o. Dekonda Shanker, who died

intestate on 24.01.2025. There is no finding or order in 7 of 8 OS No.807 of 2025 PJCJ-cum-IV AJMFC.

respect of the suit schedule ‘A’ and ‘B’ properties. However, there is no order as to costs. IA’s pending if any stands closed.

Typed to my dictation on computer by Stenographer, corrected and

pronounced by me in the open court on this the 07 thday of January, 2026.

Prl. Junior Civil Judge -cum - IV Addl. Judicial Magistrate of First Class Medchal- Malkajgiri District, Uppal at L.B.Nagar.

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

WITNESSES EXAMINED

For plaintiffs:

PW-1 : Dekonda Shanker

For defendants:None.

EXHIBITS MARKED

For plaintiffs:

Ex.A1 :Death certificate of Dekonda Sudharani (wife of plaintiff No.1), dated 24.01.2025.

Ex.A2 :Certified copy of sale deed bearing document No.3355 of 2012, dated 09.07.2012 in respect of suit schedule – ‘A’ property.

Ex.A3 :Encumbrance certificate, dated 07.04.2025 of suit schedule – ‘A’ property.

Ex.A4 :Certified copy of sale deed bearing document No.13049 of 2018, dated 27.10.2018 in respect of suit schedule – ‘B’ property.

Ex.A5 :Encumbrance certificate, dated 07.04.2025 of suit schedule – ‘B’ property.

8 of 8 OS No.807 of 2025 PJCJ-cum-IV AJMFC.

Ex.A6 :Aadhar card of plaintiff No.1.

Ex.A7 :Aadhar card of plaintiff No.2.

Ex.A8 :Aadhar card of plaintiff No.3.

Ex.A9 :Market value of suit schedule – ‘A’ property.

Ex.A10 :Market value of suit schedule – ‘B’ property.

For defendants:- Nil -

Prl. Junior Civil Judge -cum - IV Addl. Judicial Magistrate of First Class Medchal- Malkajgiri District, Uppal at L.B.Nagar.

1 of 6 OS No.908 of 2025 PJCJ-cum-IV AJMFC.

IN THE COURT OF THE PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE-CUM-

IV ADDL. JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS,

MEDCHAL-MALKAJGIRI, UPPAL AT LB NAGAR.

Present: SRI K. SRIKANTH Prl.Junior Civil Judge-cum IV Addl. Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Medchal-Malkajgiri District, Uppal at LB Nagar.

Wednesday, the 31 stday of December, 2025.

Original Suit No.908 of 2025

Between:

1). TSR Anjaneya Sastry S/o T.V.Chalapathi Sastry, Aged about 78 years, Oec: Senior citizen, R/o.14-82, S N Colony, Opp. Bhoopathy High School, Uppal, Peerzadiguda, Medipally Mandal, Hyderabad, Medchai-Malkajgiri, Telangana.

2). Srikanth Tadepalli S/o Tadepalli Sitarama Anjaneya Sastry. Aged about 46 years, Occ: Private employee, R/o 82 & 83, 14-82, Swaroop Nagar, Uppal, Hyderabad, Medchal-Malkajgiri, Telangana.

3). Sharath Tadepalli S/o Tadepalli Sitacama Apjaneya Sastry. Aged about 46 years, Oce: Private employee, R/o.14-82, S N Colony, Opp. Bhoopathy High School, Uppal, Peerzadiguda, Medipally Mandal, Hyderabad, Medchai-Malkajgiri, Telangana. …….Plaintiffs. AND 1). The Tahsildar/ MRO, Medipally, Medchal-Malkajgiri District.

2). All Concerned. ……….Defendants.

2 of 6 OS No.908 of 2025 PJCJ-cum-IV AJMFC.

This suit is coming before me for final hearing in the presence of Sri Raja Gopallavan Tayi, learned counsel for the plaintiffs and defendants are exparte andupon perusing the material papers on record, upon hearing the arguments of plaintiffs side and the matter having stood over for consideration till this day, the court delivered the following:

JUDGMENT

[1]. This suit is filed by the plaintiffs to declare them as legal heirs of deceased Late Tadepalli Syamala for the purpose of legal status only.

[2]. The case of the plaintiffs, in brief, is that plaintiff No.1 is husband and plaintiffs No.2 & 3 are sons of of Late Tadepalli

Syamala, who died on 17.06.2020 leaving behind plaintiffs as her surviving legal heirs and she was a retired private employee. After the death of Late Tadepalli Syamala, the plaintiffs have obtained the death certificate of Late Tadepalli Syamala and approached the defendant No.1 office on 19.05.2025 and requested orally that they require legal heir certificate of Late Tadepalli Syamala, upon which the defendant No.1 stated that the legal heirs certificate will be issued only to the Government servants, hence directed the plaintiffs to approach appropriate Civil Court for obtaining the legal heir certificate, as such the plaintiffs herein have filed this present suit to declare them as the legal heirs of deceased Late Tadepalli Syamala 3 of 6 OS No.908 of 2025 PJCJ-cum-IV AJMFC.

only for the purpose of legal status only. To show the legal status of the plaintiffs that they are the legal heirs of the deceased and no other legal heirs except the above mentioned plaintiffs. The deceased was the member of the family and the plaintiffs are dependent on the benefits of the deceased only, hence to enjoy all the benefits as per law, it is required to declare the plaintiffs as legal heirs of Late Tadepalli Syamala for the purpose of legal status.

Hence, the plaintiffs are constrained to file the present suit for declaration of legal heirs for legal status only. Hence, this suit.

[3]. On 26.09.2025 the defendant No.2 is also set exparte as no objections received for the paper publication. The defendant No.1 was set exparte on 02.12.2025 as none appeared before the court inspite of service of summons.

[4]. On behalf of plaintiffs, the plaintiff No.1 is examined as

PW-1 and Ex.A1 to A5 are marked.

[5]. Heard the learned counsel for the plaintiffs.

[6]. Now the point for determination is “whether the

plaintiffs are entitled for the relief of declaration to declare

4 of 6 OS No.908 of 2025 PJCJ-cum-IV AJMFC.

them as the legal heirs of deceased Late Tadepalli Syamala,

who died on 17.06.2020, as prayed for”?

Point: [7]. To prove their case, the plaintiff No.1 examined as PW-1 and filed chief affidavit in lieu of his chief-examination wherein he has reiterated the averments of the plaint. On perusal of the entire material on record, Ex.A1/original death certificate of deceased Late

Tadepalli Syamala would indicate about her deceased on 17.06.2020. Ex.A2 to Ex.A5 are the Aadhar cards of deceased and plaintiffs respectively and they altogether establish their relationship with that of the deceased.

[8]. As per section 34 of Specific Relief Act: Any person entitled to any legal character right or status may institute a suit against any person denying or interested to deny his title to such character right or status and this court may in its discretion make a declaration that he is so entitled.

[9]. From the evidence of PW-1 coupled with the documents marked as Ex.A1 to Ex.A5, the plaintiffs have established that the deceased Tadepalli Syamala died on 17.06.2020 and the plaintiffs are his legal heirs. As per Ex.A2, the plaintiff No.1 is husband of deceased and as per Ex.A4 and Ex.A5, the plaintiffs No.2 and 3 are 5 of 6 OS No.908 of 2025 PJCJ-cum-IV AJMFC.

the sons of plaintiff No.1 whose name is also reflecting as husband of deceased in her death certificate marked under Ex.A1.

Therefore, there is no dispute with regard to relationship with deceased person. The unchallenged evidence of plaintiffs both oral and documentary evidence establishes the claim of the plaintiffs as

PW-1 was not cross-examined by the defendants as they remained as ex-parte. Therefore, this Court is of the consider view that the plaintiffs are entitled for the relief of declaration to declare them as legal heirs of deceased Tadepalli Syamala. The point is answered accordingly.

[10]. In the result, the suit is decreed exparte, declaring the plaintiffs as the legal heirs of deceased Tadepalli Syamala, who died on 17.06.2020. However, there is no order as to costs. IA’s pending if any stands closed.

Typed to my dictation on computer by Stenographer, corrected and pronounced by me in the open court on this the 31 stday of December, 2025.

Prl. Junior Civil Judge -cum - IV Addl. Judicial Magistrate of First Class Medchal- Malkajgiri District, Uppal at L.B.Nagar.

6 of 6 OS No.908 of 2025 PJCJ-cum-IV AJMFC.

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

WITNESSES EXAMINED

For plaintiffs: PW-1 : TSR Anjaneya Sastry

For defendants: None.

EXHIBITS MARKED

For plaintiffs:

Ex.A1:Certified copy of death certificate of Late Tadepalli Syamala.

Ex.A2 :Original Aadhaar card of Late Tadepalli Syamala.

Ex.A3 :Original Aadhaar card of plaintiff No.1.

Ex.A4 :Original Aadhaar card of plaintiff No.2.

Ex.A5 :Original Aadhaar card of plaintiff No.3.

For defendants:- Nil -

Prl. Junior Civil Judge -cum - IV Addl. Judicial Magistrate of First Class Medchal- Malkajgiri District, Uppal at L.B.Nagar.

CC.No.3089/2020

Accused No.1 to 3 absent. Counsel present and filed memo along

with quash order passed by Hon’ble High Court for the state

of Telangana in I.A.No.1/2024 in Crl.P.No.1587, 1588 of 2024,

dated 08.12.2025 wherein the proceedings against accused No.1 to

3 are quashed. As per the above orders the case against accused

No.1 to 3 is dismissed as quashed. Any Crl.M.P’s stands

closed.

IV AJMFC

A SMILE

A smile is a simple yet powerful expression that can brighten anyone’s day. It is a universal language that everyone understands, no matter where they are from. A genuine smile reflects happiness, kindness, and positivity. It can make us feel better even in difficult situations.

Smiling has many benefits. It can reduce stress, improve mood, and make us look more approachable. When we smile, we not only feel good ourselves but also make others feel happy. It helps build better relationships and spreads joy around us.

A smile costs nothing but gives much. It is a gift we can give freely to others. Even a stranger's smile can lift our spirits. In times of sadness or loneliness, a smile can bring comfort and hope.

In conclusion, a smile is a small gesture with a big impact. We should try to smile often and share it with the world. After all, a smiling face is the most beautiful expression anyone can wear.

CC.No.5831/2021

Police filed report stating that the accused has died and filed copy of Death Certificate. Hence the case is abated as died.

IV AJMFC

A SMILE

A smile is a simple yet powerful expression that can brighten anyone’s day. It is a universal language that everyone understands, no matter where they are from. A genuine smile reflects happiness, kindness, and positivity. It can make us feel better even in difficult situations.

Smiling has many benefits. It can reduce stress, improve mood, and make us look more approachable. When we smile, we not only feel good ourselves but also make others feel happy. It helps build better relationships and spreads joy around us.

A smile costs nothing but gives much. It is a gift we can give freely to others. Even a stranger's smile can lift our spirits. In times of sadness or loneliness, a smile can bring comfort and hope.

In conclusion, a smile is a small gesture with a big impact. We should try to smile often and share it with the world. After all, a smiling face is the most beautiful expression anyone can wear.