1
IN THE COURT OF THE II ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE,
MADANAPALLE
Present :: Smt. K.V. Mahalakshmi, II Additional District Judge, Madanapalle.
Dated this the Third (03th) day of April, Two thousand and Nineteen.
ORIGINAL SUIT No.09/2016
Between: Poojari Raghupathi, s/o late P.krishnamurthy, aged about 63 years, Hindu, r/at Chinnathippasamuram village and post, Madanapalle mandal, Chittoor District. … Plaintiff
And:
1. Peram Samba Murthy, s/o Venkatramana, aged about 48 yrs, Hindu, residing near Gangammatemple,Tirupathiroad, Chinnathippasamudram,Madanapalle mandal.
2. Peram Chalapathi, s/o Venkatramana, aged about 50 years, Hindu, r/at Pillakota Veedhi, nearGangammaGudi, Chinnathippasamuram, Madanapalle, Mandal.
3. Peram Manohar @ Mani, s/o P.Sambamurthy, aged about 30 years, residing near Gangamma temple,TirupathiRoad, Chinnathippasamudram,Madanapalle mandal.
4. Peram Mallikarjuna, s/o P.Sambamurthy, aged about 28 years, r/at Gangamma temple, Tirupathi Road,Chinnathippasamuram, Madanapalle Mandal.
5. Peram Manjunath, s/o P.Sambamurthy, aged about 26 yrs, residing near Gangamma temple,TirupatiRoad, Chinnathippasamudram,Madanapalle Mandal.
6. Garla Lakshmi Kanthamma, w/o late G.R. Pandurangaiah, aged about 55 years, Hindu, r/at D.No.15297, Gandhi Road, Madanapalle.
7. G.Ranamma, w/o G.Adinarayana, aged about 53 years, r/at Thandeevari Veedhi, CTM post, Madanapalle Mandal.
2
8. G.V.Chalapathi, s/o late G.Radhakrishnaiah, aged about 48 years, Hindu, r/at D.No.1549, Sreeramulu Veedhi, Madanapalle town and Mandal.
9. G.Ramamurthy, s/o late G.Radhakrishnaiah, aged about 46 years, r/at D.No.898, Raghavendra Rao street, Madanapalle, Chittoor District.
10. G.Lakshmipathi, s/o late G.Radhakrishnaiah, aged about 43 years, Hindu, r/at Bazaar street, CTM post, Madanapalle mandal.
11. G.Raveendra, s/o late G.Radhakrishnaiah, aged about 40 years, r/at D.No.15279/A, Gandhi Road, Madanapalle, Chittoor District.
… Defendants
This suit coming on this day before me in the presence of Sri
N.S.N.Prasad, Advocate for Plaintiff, and Sri G.M.Reddy, Advocate for D1 to D3; Sri M.Chaitanya Kumar, Advocate for D6 to D11 and
D4 and D5 remained exparte the court delivered the following:
J U D G M E N T
This is the suit to declare the right and title over the suit property and delivery of possession after demolition of the construction and to grant mandatory injunction for the removal of the construction made by the D1 to D5 and for grant of permanent injunction from executing registered documents and to direct D1 to
D5 to pay Rs.60,000/ p.a towards damages for their illegal usage and for costs.
Counsel for plaintiff submitted that plaintiff may be called plaintiff is called absent. Hence this suit is hereby dismissed for default of nonappearance of plaintiff. In these circumstances there shall be no order as to costs.
3
Pronounced by me in the open Court, this the 03th day of April,
2019.
II Additional District Judge, Madanapalle.
Appendix of Evidence Nil -
II Additional District Judge, Madanapalle.
4
IN THE COURT OF THE II ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE,
MADANAPALLE
Present :: Smt. K.V. Mahalakshmi,
II Additional District Judge,
Madanapalle.
Wednesday, the sixth (06 th ) day of June,
Two thousand and eighteen.
ORIGINAL SUIT No.53/2014
Between: Sokkam Sathyanarayana, … Plaintiff
And:
1. M. Nagaraju,
2. S. Anasuyamma,
3. P. Mohammad Javeed, … Defendants
This suit coming on this day for final disposal before me in the presence of Sri K. Sreedhar, Advocate for Plaintiff, and Smt M.
Malathi, Advocate for Defendants NO.1 and 3 and Sri Sarasa
Subramanyam, Advocate for Defendant No.2 and costs not paid.
Counsel for plaintiff submitted that party may be called. Plaintiff is called absent. Hence this suit is hereby dismissed for default of nonappearance of plaintiff and nonpayment of costs, the court delivered the following:
J U D G M E N T
1. Suit for recovery of Rs.25,87,992/ being the principal and interest due on a A marked pronote for Rs.8,62,997/, dated 21.05.2011 and B Marked Pronote for Rs.8,62,664/, dated 22.05.2011 and C Marked Pronote for Rs.8,62,331/pronote
dated 23.05.2011 in total of Rs.25,87,992/ executed by the
defendnats 1 to 3 in favour of plaintiff for agreeing to repay the 5 same with interest at 24% p.a. on demand either to the plaintiff or to his order and thereafter failed to discharge the debt.
2. The costs not paid. Counsel for plaintiff submitted that party may be called. Plaintiff is called absent. Hence this suit is hereby dismissed for default of nonappearance of plaintiff and non payment of costs; and
3. There shall be no order as to costs.
Pronounced by me in the open Court, this the 06th day of June,
2018.
II Additional District Judge, Madanapalle.
Appendix of Evidence
Nil -
II Additional District Judge, Madanapalle.
Draft/Fair Judgment in
O.S. No. 53 / 2014
Dated 06.06.2018
6
IN THE COURT OF THE II ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE,
MADANAPALLE
Present :: Smt. K.V. Mahalakshmi,
II Additional District Judge,
Madanapalle.
Wednesday, the fourth (04 th ) day of April,
Two thousand and Eighteen.
ORIGINAL SUIT No.87/2012
Between: J.A. Nagabushanam, … Plaintiff And:
1. J.A. Radhakrishna,
2. J.A. Satyanarayana,
3. J.A. Harinath,
4. A.M. Geetha Rani,
5. Bharathi Lakshmi,
6. J.R. Rajeswari,
7. J.N. Ashok,
8. V. Rupa Sundramma,
9. Sandra Padmavathamma,
10. R. Vijayamma, … Defendants
This suit coming on this day for final disposal before me in the presence of Sri Sarasa Subrahmanyam, Advocate for Plaintiff and Sri Y Sambasiva Reddy, Advocate for Defendants No.1 and 6 and Sri N.V. Prasad, Advocate for Defendant No.4 and 5, Sri B.
Bhujanga Rao, Advocate for Defendant No.2 and Sri K. Sreedhar,
Advocate for Defendant No.7 and Sri P Damodar Naidu, Advocate for Defendant No.3. I.A.No.54/2018 is allowed. The plaint is being returned for presentation before the proper forum, the court delivered the following: 7
J U D G M E N T
4. Suit to declare that the Lok Adalath Award Agreement dated 15.11.2003 in O.S.No.158/1992 on the file of Senior Civil Judge,
Madanapalle unenforceable under law being void abinitio; declare and reopeneing the Sec.44 of Transfer of Property Act; the law of partition and Rules 1893 in O.S.No.158/1992 on the file of Senior Civil Judge, Madanapalle on 15.11.2003 including the Lok Adlat Award dated 15.11.2003 in it passing a preliminary decree and the consequent final decree for partition and separate posession of the entire estate of J.S. Anjaneyulu into five shares and to allot 1/5th share through court, after division by metes and bounds and for costs of the suit.
5. I.A.No.54/2018 is allowed. The plaint is being returned for presentation before the proper forum; and
6. There shall be no order as to costs.
Pronounced by me in the open Court, this the 04th day of April,
2018.
II Additional District Judge, Madanapalle.
Appendix of Evidence
Nil -
II Additional District Judge, Madanapalle.
Draft/Fair Judgment in
O.S. No. 87 / 2012
Dated 04.04.2018
8
IN THE COURT OF THE II ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE,
MADANAPALLE
Present :: Smt. K.V. Mahalakshmi,
II Additional District Judge,
Madanapalle.
Monday, the sixteenth (16 th ) day of April,
Two thousand and eighteen.
ORIGINAL SUIT No.26/2017
Between:
1. S. Mohammad Arshad Ali,
2. S Mohammad Elliyaz,
3. Patnul Rameesa Bee, … Plaintiffs And:
1. S. Mohammad Afroz,
2. S. Zaheerun,
3. S. Mohammad Rameez (Minor ) (3rd Defendant is minor and represented by his guardian/next friend mother S. Zaheerun 2nd Defendant)
4. M. Shanawaz,
5. M. Nyamathulla,
6. M. Kalimulla, … Defendants
This suit coming on this day for final disposal before me in the presence of Sri K.M. Kalimullah, Advocate for Plaintiff. Suit summons to D1 to D3 not paid. No representation from the counsel for plaintiff since call work. Plaintiff is called absent matter is passed over till 5 p.m. Hence this suit is hereby dismissed for default of non payment of process, the court delivered the following: 9
J U D G M E N T
7. Suit for division and partition of the plaintiffs 50/96th share (P.1 17/96th share P2 17/96th share and P3 16/96th share) in the plaint schedule properties by meats and bounds and for separate possession of the same, for permanent injunction restraining the defendants 4 to 6 from in any manner interfering with the possession and enjoyment of the plaintiffs and for costs of the suit.
8. Suit summons to D1 to D3 not paid. No representation from the counsel for plaintiff since call work. Plaintiff is called absent matter is passed over till 5 p.m. Hence this suit is hereby dismissed for default of non payment of process; and
9. There shall be no order as to costs.
Pronounced by me in the open Court, this the 14th day of
February, 2018.
II Additional District Judge, Madanapalle.
Appendix of Evidence
Nil -
II Additional District Judge, Madanapalle.
Draft/Fair Judgment in
O.S. No. 26 / 2017
Dated 16.04.2018
10
IN THE COURT OF THE II ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE,
MADANAPALLE
Present :: Smt. K.V. Mahalakshmi,
II Additional District Judge,
Madanapalle.
Monday, the second (02 nd ) day of April,
Two thousand and Eighteen.
ORIGINAL SUIT No.56/2011
Between: Gangarapu Sudha Rani reptd by GPA holder Sri G.
Prabhakar Naidu (recognised in I.A.482/2015 dated 02.08.2017), … Plaintiff And: 1.R.V. Krishnamurthy, 2.Ratakonda Rajendra Prasad (since died)
3. Ratakonda Suresh,
4. Marpuri Dhanunjaya (since died)
5. Marpuri Janardhana (since died)
6. Marpuri Ramanna,
7. M. Sarojamma,
8. M. Ramesh,
9. M. Rangaswamy Naidu,
10. Chalapathi,
11. R Kalavathi (Defendants 7 to 11 are added as per the orders in I.A.136/2012, dated 25.07.2012)
12. Ratakonda Charan
13. Ratakonda Arun,
14. Ratakonda Rukmanamma, (Defendants 12 to 14 are recognised as the L.R’s., of deceased defendant No.2 in I.A. No.801/2012, dated 02.08.2017
15. Vasundhara (Added as the L.R. of deceased defendant No.4 as per orders in I.A.No.839/2015, dated 02.08.2017) … Defendants 11
This suit coming on this day for final disposal before me in the presence of Sri Sarasa Subrahmanyam, Advocate for Plaintiff and Sri Vidya Sagar, Advocate for Defendants No.1 and 3 and Sri K
Manjunatha Reddy, Advocate for Defendant No.6, Sri K.V. Ranga
Reddy, Advocate for Defendants No.8 to 10 and Defendants
No.7,11 to 15 are set exparte and Defendants No.2, 4 and 5 are died and commissioner report not filed. A memo is fled on behalf of the plaintiff along with joint memo on behalf of both parties and photocopy of the registered Gift Deed dated 21.03.2018 executed in favour of the plaintiff by D1(father) memo is recorded.
In the light of the said memo dated 28.03.2018 this suit is hereby dismissed, the court delivered the following:
J U D G M E N T
10.Suit for partition and separate possession of plaintiff’s 1/4th share in plaint ‘A’ schedule property and Items 1 to 16 of plaint
B schedule property and 1/8th share of plaintiff in item no.17 of plaint B schedule property and for costs of the suit.
11.The commissioner report not filed. A memo is fled on behalf of the plaintiff along with joint memo on behalf of both parties and photocopy of the registered Gift Deed dated 21.03.2018 executed in favour of the plaintiff by D1(father) memo is recorded.
12.In the light of the said memo dated 28.03.2018 this suit is hereby dismissed ; and
13.There shall be no order as to costs.
Pronounced by me in the open Court, this the 02nd day of April,
2018.
II Additional District Judge, Madanapalle.
Appendix of Evidence
Nil - 12
II A. D. J,
Madanapalle.
13
Draft/Fair Judgment in
O.S. No. 56 / 2011
Dated 02.04.2018
14
IN THE COURT OF THE II ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE,
MADANAPALLE
Present :: Smt. K.V. Mahalakshmi,
II Additional District Judge,
Madanapalle.
Wednesday, the fourteenth (14 th ) day of February,
Two thousand and eighteen.
ORIGINAL SUIT No.53/2011
Between: Thota Rajamma @ Ganta Rajamma, … Plaintiff And:
1. Thota Venkatramana @ Nagaraja (died),
2. Thota Anjaneyulu,
3. Thota Ashok Kumar,
4. Thota Lakshmi Devi,
5. Thota Alivelamma, (Added as per orders in I.A.281/14 on 16.2.16)
6. Aluri Samiullah, (Added as per orders in I.A.405/13 on 14.12.17)
7. Pechetti Ramalakshmamma, (Added as per orders in I.A.407/13 on 14.12.17) … Defendants
This suit coming on this day for final disposal before me in the presence of Sri S Kamalulla Basha, Advocate for Plaintiff and
Sri Sarasa Subramanyam, Advocate for Defendants No.2 and 3 and
Defendants No.4, 5, 6 and 7 are set exparte and Defendant No.1 is died and PW1 is called absent. No representation from the counsel for plaintiff. Matter is passed over till 5.00 p.m. condition relaxed on the previous occasion. This is an old matter by Pre2012. Hence no reason to grant on the adjournment as such this suit is hereby dismissed for nonappearance of PW1, the court delivered the following: 15
J U D G M E N T
14.Suit for partition and separate possession of plaintiff’s 1/5th share in plaint schedule property and for costs of the suit.
15.PW1 is called absent. No representation from the counsel for plaintiff. Matter is passed over till 5.00 p.m. condition relaxed on the previous occasion. This is an old matter by Pre2012. Hence no reason to grant on the adjournment as such this suit is hereby dismissed for nonappearance of PW1 ; and
16.There shall be no order as to costs.
Pronounced by me in the open Court, this the 14th day of
February, 2018.
II Additional District Judge, Madanapalle.
Appendix of Evidence
Nil -
II A. D. J,
Madanapalle.
Draft/Fair Judgment in
O.S. No. 53 / 2011
Dated 14.02.2018
16
IN THE COURT OF THE II ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE,
MADANAPALLE
Present :: Smt. K.V. Mahalakshmi,
II Additional District Judge,
Madanapalle.
Wednesday, the fourteenth (14 th ) day of February,
Two thousand and eighteen.
ORIGINAL SUIT No.53/2011
Between: Thota Rajamma @ Ganta Rajamma, … Plaintiff And:
1. Thota Venkatramana @ Nagaraja (died),
2. Thota Anjaneyulu,
3. Thota Ashok Kumar,
4. Thota Lakshmi Devi,
5. Thota Alivelamma, (Added as per orders in I.A.281/14 on 16.2.16)
6. Aluri Samiullah, (Added as per orders in I.A.405/13 on 14.12.17)
7. Pechetti Ramalakshmamma, (Added as per orders in I.A.407/13 on 14.12.17) … Defendants
This suit coming on this day for final disposal before me in the presence of Sri S Kamalulla Basha, Advocate for Plaintiff and
Sri Sarasa Subramanyam, Advocate for Defendants No.2 and 3 and
Defendants No.4, 5, 6 and 7 are set exparte and Defendant No.1 is died and PW1 is called absent. No representation from the counsel for plaintiff. Matter is passed over till 5.00 p.m. condition relaxed on the previous occasion. This is an old matter by Pre2012. Hence no reason to grant on the adjournment as such this suit is hereby dismissed for nonappearance of PW1, the court delivered the following: 17
J U D G M E N T
17.Suit for partition and separate possession of plaintiff’s 1/5th share in plaint schedule property and for costs of the suit.
18.PW1 is called absent. No representation from the counsel for plaintiff. Matter is passed over till 5.00 p.m. condition relaxed on the previous occasion. This is an old matter by Pre2012. Hence no reason to grant on the adjournment as such this suit is hereby dismissed for nonappearance of PW1 ; and
19.There shall be no order as to costs.
Pronounced by me in the open Court, this the 14th day of
February, 2018.
II Additional District Judge, Madanapalle.
Appendix of Evidence
Nil -
II A. D. J,
Madanapalle.
Draft/Fair Judgment in
O.S. No. 53 / 2011
Dated 14.02.2018
18
IN THE COURT OF THE II ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE,
MADANAPALLE
Present :: Smt. K.V. Mahalakshmi,
II Additional District Judge,
Madanapalle.
Tuesday, the eight (08 th ) day of February,
Two thousand and eighteen.
ORIGINAL SUIT No.43/2012
Between: D Jayamma, … Plaintiff And:
1. Y Venkatramana Reddy,
2. Uma Rani,
3. tankasala Ranga Prasad,
4. G.P. Reddeppa Reddy,
5. M. Indira,
6. K.P. Vijaya Lakshmi,
7. Katari Rani Indira,
8. K.P. Saroja Devi,
9. Y Venkatramana Reddy,
10. Gurramkonda Mallaiah,
11. Chilakapati Subramanyam,
12. P. Reddeppa Reddy,
13. Kallurolla Raja Reddy, … Defendants This suit coming on this day for final disposal before me in the presence of Sri S Vidya Sagar, Advocate for Petitioner and Sri A
Phani, Advocate for Defendants No.1 and 2 and Sri S.V. Raghavan,
Advocate for Defendant No.4 to 8 and 10 to 13, and Sri Defendant
No.3 is set exparte and Defendant No.9 is Dismissed and the plaintiff is called absent. No representation from the counsel for plaintiff since call work. Costs not paid matter is passed over till 5.00 p.m. hence this suit is hereby dismissed for default of non appearance of plaintiff and nonpayment of costs, the court delivered the following: 19
J U D G M E N T
20.Suit for partition and as per the plaint pleadings, it is averred that the suit schedule property is the ancestral property succeeded by Yerragadal Ramaiah, and that the plaintiff is the legitimate child where as the D1 and D2 the illegitimate children of the said Ramaiah and that he died intestate as such the suit schedule property has got to be shared as per the Hindu law i.e., the plaintiff gets half share and in the remaining half the D1 and
D2 and the plaintiff get equal shares. It is averred that the plaintiff is in joint possession and enjoyment of the same. It is further averred that in the family adjustment as per the elderly advise the D1 also executed a registered Gift Deed infavour of the plaintiff dated 15.02.1993 and for costs of the suit.
21.Plaintiff is called absent. No representation from the counsel for plaintiff since call work. Costs not paid matter is passed over till 5.00 p.m. hence this suit is hereby dismissed for default of nonappearance of plaintiff and nonpayment of costs ; and
22.There shall be no order as to costs.
Pronounced by me in the open Court, this the 08th day of
February, 2018.
II Additional District Judge, Madanapalle.
Appendix of Evidence
Nil -
II A. D. J,
Madanapalle.
Draft/Fair Judgment in
O.S. No. 43 / 2012
Dated 08.02.2018
IN THE COURT OF THE II ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE,
MADANAPALLE
20
Present :: Smt. K.V. Mahalakshmi,
II Additional District Judge,
Madanapalle.
Tuesday, the eight (08 th ) day of February,
Two thousand and eighteen.
ORIGINAL SUIT No.05/2018
Between: V.K. Mohan Reddy, … Plaintiff
And: Jinkala Pushpalatha, … Defendant
This suit coming on this day for final disposal before me in the presence of Sri B. Bhujanga Rao, Advocate for Plaintiff, and an
Full Satisfaction memo is filed on behalf of the plaintiff stating that the matter is settled with the intervention of the elders and the plaintiff had received the amount to full satisfaction of the claim.
Full Satisfaction is recorded and this suit is hereby dismissed as adjusted out of court, the court delivered the following:
J U D G M E N T
23.Suit for recovery of Rs.18,08,500/ being the principal and interest due on a pronote dated 20.04.2016 executed by the defendnat in favour of plaintiff for Rs.15,00,000/ agreeing to repay the same with interest at 12% p.a. on demand either to the plaintiff or to his order and thereafter failed to discharge the debt.
24.An Full Satisfaction memo is filed on behalf of the plaintiff stating that the matter is settled with the intervention of the elders and the plaintiff had received the amount to full 21 satisfaction of the claim. Full Satisfaction is recorded and this suit is hereby dismissed as adjusted out of court .
25.There shall be no order as to costs.
Pronounced by me in the open Court, this the 08th day of
February, 2018.
II Additional District Judge, Madanapalle.
Appendix of Evidence
Nil -
II A. D. J,
Madanapalle.
Draft/Fair Judgment in
O.S. No. 05 / 2018
Dated 08.02.2018
22
IN THE COURT OF THE II ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE,
MADANAPALLE
Present :: Smt. K.V. Mahalakshmi,
II Additional District Judge,
Madanapalle.
Thursday, the second (02 nd ) day of November,
Two thousand and seventeen.
ORIGINAL SUIT No.25/2016
Between: G Venkataramana, … Plaintiff
And: K Lakshmi, … Defendant
This suit coming on this day for final disposal before me in the presence of Sri K. Raghupathi, Advocate for Plaintiff, and of Sri
B Amarnatha Reddy, Advocate for Defendant and I.A.No.1183/17 is allowed and the compromise decree is hereby passed in accordance with the terms of compromise agreed between the parties, the court delivered the following:
J U D G M E N T
26.Suit for specific performance of an agreement of sale, dated 18.01.2016, directing the defendant to execute a registered sale deed in favour of the plaintiff in pursuance of the agreement of sale dated 18.01.2016 by receiving the balance of sale consideration and if the defendant faild to do so, the same may be done through process of law and for costs.
27.I.A.No.1183/17 is allowed and the compromise decree is hereby passed in accordance with the terms of compromise agreed between the parties .
23
28.However there shall be no order as to costs.
Pronounced by me in the open Court, this the 02nd day of
November, 2017.
Sd/ K.V. Mahalakshmi
II Additional District Judge, Madanapalle.
Appendix of Evidence
Nil -
Sd/ K.V. Mahalakshmi
II A. D. J,
Madanapalle.
Draft/Fair Judgment in
O.S. No. 25 / 2016
Dated 02.11.2017
24
IN THE COURT OF THE II ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE,
MADANAPALLE
Present :: Smt. K.V. Mahalakshmi,
II Additional District Judge,
Madanapalle.
Thursday, the sixteenth (16th) day of November,
Two thousand and seventeen.
ORIGINAL SUIT No.100/2011
Between: Galeti Sreenivasulu, … Plaintiff
And:
1. Goparaju Viswanatha Rao,
2. Goparaju Krishnamurthy,
3. Goparaju Lakshmi Narasimha Rao, … Defendants
This suit coming on this day for final disposal before me in the presence of Sri N.S.N. Prasad, Advocate for Plaintiff, and of Sri
K.M. Kalimullah, Advocate for 1st Defendant, Sri D Mohan Rami
Reddy, Advocate for 2nd Defendant and Sri M Chaithanya Kumar,
Advocate for 3rd Defendant and no representation from the counsel for plaintiff. Despite conditional docket order. Plaintiff is called absent. Matter is passed over till 5 p.m. This is a matter of Pre 2012. Hence no reason to grant for the adjournment. As such this suit is hereby dismissed for default of nonappearance of plaintiff.
the court delivered the following:
J U D G M E N T
29.Suit for specific performance of an agreement of sale, executed by the defendants 1 and 2 in favour of plaintiff for
Rs.36,00,000/ or to pass a decree for partition 2/3rd share of defendants 1 and 2 in plaint schedule property and direct to D1 25 and D2 execute sale deed to the extent of 2/3rd share of alternatively direct D1 and D2 to refund the earnest amount of
Rs.6,00,000/ and for costs.
30.No representation from the counsel for plaintiff. Despite conditional docket order. Plaintiff is called absent. Matter is passed over till 5 p.m. This is a matter of Pre2012. Hence no reason to grant for the adjournment. As such this suit is hereby dismissed for default of nonappearance of plaintiff..
31.In the circumstances there shall be no order as to costs.
Pronounced by me in the open Court, this the 16th day of
November, 2017.
Sd/ K.V. Mahalakshmi
II Additional District Judge, Madanapalle.
Appendix of Evidence
Nil -
Sd/ K.V. Mahalakshmi
II A. D. J,
Madanapalle.
Draft/Fair Judgment in
O.S. No. 100 / 2011
Dated 16.11.2017
26
IN THE COURT OF THE II ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE,
MADANAPALLE
Present :: Smt. K.V. Mahalakshmi,
II Additional District Judge,
Madanapalle.
Thursday, the Second (02 nd ) day of November,
Two thousand and seventeen.
ORIGINAL SUIT No.25/2016
Between: G Venkataramana, … Plaintiff
And: K Lakshmi … Defendant
This suit coming on this day for final disposal before me in the presence of Sri K. Raghupathi, Advocate for Plaintiff, and of Sri
B. Amarnatha Reddy, Advocate for Defendant, and IA.1183/2017 is allowed and the compromise decree is hereby passed in accordance with the a memo is filed on behalf of the plaintiff stating that the plaintiff is not present the suit as withdrawn. Memo is recorded and this suit is hereby dismissed as not pressed, the court delivered the following:
J U D G M E N T
32.Suit for specific performance of an agreement of sale, directing the defendants to execute a regular registered sale deed in favour of plaintiff for the plaint schedule properties in pursuance of the agreement dated 03.01.1996 and if the defendants fails to execute a registered sale deed, the court may execute the registered sale deed in favour of plaintiff and for costs.
27
33.A memo is filed on behalf of the plaintiff stating that the plaintiff is not present the suit as withdrawn. Memo is recorded and this suit is hereby dismissed as not pressed.
34.In the circumstances there shall be no order as to costs.
Pronounced by me in the open Court, this the 02nd day of August,
2017.
Sd/ K.V. Mahalakshmi
II Additional District Judge, Madanapalle.
Appendix of Evidence
Nil -
Sd/ K.V. Mahalakshmi
II A. D. J,
Madanapalle.
28
IN THE COURT OF THE II ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE,
MADANAPALLE
Present :: Smt. K.V. Mahalakshmi,
II Additional District Judge,
Madanapalle.
Monday, the twenty third (23 rd ) day of October,
Two thousand and seventeen.
ORIGINAL SUIT No.24/2007
Between: 1.Syed Ghouse Basha … Plaintiff
And:
1. N Pulla Reddy,
2. Amineni Narayana Swamy,
3. Kappala Papanna,
4. Kappala Venkataramana,
5. Kappala Jagannatham @ Jaganna,
6. K Sreenivasulu,
7. K Bhaskara,
8. D Yella Reddy,
9. S Ashrafunnisa,
10. S Shahataj Begam,
11. S Hussain @ Showkath Hussain,
12. S Zakeer Hussain,
13. S Rahimuddin,
14. S Noor Hussain,
15. S Anwar Hussain,
16. K Venkatramana,
17. S Rajamma,
18. Kappala Ananda,
19. S Meharunnisa,
20. K Papanna,
21. A Bhanu Prakash,
22. A Bharathi, … Defendant
This suit coming on this day for final disposal before me in the presence of Sri S Seshachalapathi, Sri A.V. Siva Kumar Reddy, Advocate for Defendant No.3, 4, 6 and 7, Sri M.R. Sekhar Naidu, Advocate for 29
Defendant No.5, Sri N.S.N. Prasad, Advocate for Defendant No.9 to 15,
Sri B Amarnatha Reddy, Advocate for Defendant No.16 and 17, Sri S
Vijaykumar, Advocate for D18, Sri B Bhujanga Rao, Advocate for
Defendant No.21 and 22, Sri S Kamal Basha, Advocate for Defendant
No.19 and Defendant 1 and 20 are remained exparte and Defendants
No.2, 8 and 9 are died. A memo is filed on behalf of D9 to D15 stating that D8 died on 05.12.2014 and D20 died about three years ago. The counsel for plaintiff submitted that party may be called. Plaintiff is called absent. Hence this suit is hereby dismissed for default of non appearance of plaintiff , the court delivered the following:
J U D G M E N T
35.Suit for partition of Ac.1.01 cents from out of Ac.6.06 cents of
Plaint Schedule property and for separate possession to the plaintiff and for costs of the suit.
36.A memo is filed on behalf of D9 to D15 stating that D8 died on 05.12.2014 and D20 died about three years ago. The counsel for plaintiff submitted that party may be called. Plaintiff is called absent.
Hence this suit is hereby dismissed for default of non appearance of plaintiff ; and
37.There shall be no order as to costs.
Pronounced by me in the open Court, this the 23rd day of October,
2017.
II Additional District Judge, Madanapalle.
Appendix of Evidence
Nil -
II A. D. J,
Madanapalle.
Draft/Fair Judgment in
O.S. No. 24 / 2007
Dated 23.10.2017
30
IN THE COURT OF THE II ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE,
MADANAPALLE
Present :: Smt. K.V. Mahalakshmi,
II Additional District Judge,
Madanapalle.
Thursday, the fifth (05 th ) day of October,
Two thousand and seventeen.
ORIGINAL SUIT No.14/2012
Between: N.S.S. Aparna w/o Sreekanth Babu, Hindu, aged about 37 years, Inspector of Police, II town police station, Madanapalle,
Chittoor District, residing at D.No.II250F10, Reddies
Colony, Madanapalle.
… Plaintiff
And: U Venkatramana s/o not known, aged about 49 years,
Hindu, Publisher, Ashoka Magazine, D.No.31534, CSR
Buildings, Near RTC Bus Stand, Hospital Branch Road,
Madanapalle.
… Defendant
This suit coming on this day for final disposal before me in the presence of Sri N.S.N. Prasad, Advocate for Plaintiff, Sri B Amarnatha
Reddy, Advocate for Defendant, and plaintiff is called absent. Hence, this suit is hereby dismissed for default for non appearance of Plaintiff, the court delivered the following:
J U D G M E N T
38.Suit to direct the defendant to pay Rs.15,00,000/ to the plaintiff by way of damages for making false, defamatory and scandalous allegations in his Ashoka Monthly Magazine November, Part, 2011 with interest 12.5% p.a and for costs of the suit.
31
39.The plaintiff is called absent. Hence, this suit is hereby dismissed for default for non appearance of Plaintiff; and
40.There shall be no order as to costs.
Pronounced by me in the open Court, this the 05th day of October,
2017.
II Additional District Judge, Madanapalle.
Appendix of Evidence
Nil -
II A. D. J,
Madanapalle.
Draft/Fair Judgment in
O.S. No. 14 / 2012
Dated 05.10.2017
32
IN THE COURT OF THE II ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE,
MADANAPALLE
Present :: Smt. K.V. Mahalakshmi,
II Additional District Judge,
Madanapalle.
Wednesday, the twenty first (21 st ) day of June,
Two thousand and seventeen.
ORIGINAL SUIT No.09/2007
Between:
1. Sugutoor Ramesh,
2. Sugutoor Basavalinga Raja @ Basava Raj … Plaintiffs
And:
1. Sugutoor Raja Basava Raja,
2. Sugutoor Rajendra, … Defendants
This suit coming on this day for final disposal before me in the presence of Sri S Kamalulla Basha, Advocate for Plaintiffs, Sri Sarasa
Subramanyam, Advocate for 1st Defendant, and Sri B Venugopal,
Advocate for 2nd defendant and a joint memo is filed on behalf of both parties stating that this matter is amicably settled with the intervention of the elders. Hence both this suit as well as counter claim may be dismissed without costs. Memo is recorded. Counsel for defnednat who had setup a counter claim also endorsed no objection on the memo. In view of the said memo this suit and as well as the counter claim set up by the D1 are hereby dismissed as adjusted out of court, the court delivered the following:-
J U D G M E N T
41.Suit for partition directing the defendants to divide item no.1 of schedule property into 24 equal shares and allot 10 such shares to the 1st plaintiff and 9 such shares to the 2nd plaintiff and also to divide item 33 no.2 of the schedule property into 24 equal shares and allot 4 such shares to the 1st plaintiff and 4 shares to the 2nd plaintiff by metes and bounds and put the plaintiffs in possession of the same and for costs of the suit.
42.The following issues are settled for trial:-
1. Whether the Kararunama dated 27.06.1986 regarding item no.1 of plaint schedule is true, genuine and valid ?
2. Whether the partition list, dated 19.09.1999 is a fabricated document ?
3. Whether the plaintiffs are entitled for partition of the plaint schedule properties and for possession of their share in them as prayed for ?
4. To What relief ?
43.A joint memo is filed on behalf of both parties stating that this matter is amicably settled with the intervention of the elders. Hence both this suit as well as counter claim may be dismissed without costs. Memo is recorded. Counsel for defnednat who had setup a counter claim also endorsed no objection on the memo. In view of the said memo this suit and as well as the counter claim set up by the D1 are hereby dismissed as adjusted out of court; and
44.In those circumstances there shall be no order as to costs.
Pronounced by me in the open Court, this the 03rd day of October, 2017.
II Additional District Judge, Madanapalle.
Appendix of Evidence
Nil - -
II A. D. J,
Madanapalle.
Draft/Fair Judgment in 34
O.S. No. 09 / 2007
Dated 03.10.2017
35
IN THE COURT OF THE II ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE,
MADANAPALLE
Present :: Smt. K.V. Mahalakshmi,
II Additional District Judge,
Madanapalle.
Thursday, the twelvth (12 th ) day of October, 2017.
ORIGINAL SUIT No.49/2010
Between: J.A. Harinath … Plaintiff
And:
3. J.A. Satyanarayana,
4. J.A. Nagabhushanam, … Defendants
This suit coming on this day for final disposal before me in the presence of Sri Y Sambasiva Reddy, Advocate for Plaintiff, Sri B
Bhujanga Rao, Advocate for 1stDefendant, and Sri Sarasa
Subramanyam, Advocate for 3rd Defendant, and I.A.1159/2017 is pending and allowed. Consequently plaintiff is permitted to withdraw the suit with liberty to initiate final decree proceedings in I.A.
1596/2008 in O.S.158/1992. Accordingly this suit is hereby dismissed as withdrawn with liberty, the court delivered the following:-
J U D G M E N T
45.Suit for partition and separate possession of plaintiffs half share in the plaint schedule property and for costs of the suit.
46.The following issues are settled for trial:-
1. Whether the plaintiff is entitled for partition and separate possession of his half share in the plaint schedule property ?
2. To What relief ?
36
47.I.A.1159/2017 is pending and allowed. Consequently plaintiff is permitted to withdraw the suit with liberty to initiate final decree proceedings in I.A. 1596/2008 in O.S.158/1992. Accordingly this suit is hereby dismissed as withdrawn with liberty; and
48.There shall be no order as to costs.
Pronounced by me in the open Court, this the 12th day of October, 2017.
II Additional District Judge, Madanapalle.
Appendix of Evidence
Nil - -
II A. D. J,
Madanapalle.
Draft/Fair Judgment in
O.S. No. 49 / 2010
Dated 12.10.2017
37
IN THE COURT OF THE II ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE,
MADANAPALLE
Present :: Smt. K.V. Mahalakshmi,
II Additional District Judge,
Madanapalle.
Tuesday, the fifth (05 th ) day of September, 2017.
ORIGINAL SUIT No.66/2014
Between:
1. P Purushotam Reddy,
2. P. Parvathamma, … Plaintiffs
And:
5. D Mahaboob Basha, … Defendant
This suit coming on this day for final disposal before me in the presence of Sri K Jitendra, Advocate for Plaintiffs, and Sri S Kamalulla
Basha, and the counsel for plaintiff submitted that party may be called.
Plaintiff is called absent. Hence this suit is hereby dismissed for default of non-appearance of the plaintiff, the court delivered the following:-
J U D G M E N T
49.Suit for a direction to the defendant to execute a Registered
Redemption Deed by caceling the original Registered Simple Mortgage
Deed vide Doc.No.4252/2013, dated 03.06.2013 by receiving the balance amount of Rs.30,000/- from the plaintiff in default to get it done through the process of law and for costs of the suit.
50.The following issues are settled for trial:-
1. Whether the plaintiffs are entitled for the relief against the defendant as prayed for ?
38
2. To What relief ?
51.The counsel for plaintiff submitted that party may be called.
Plaintiff is called absent. Hence this suit is hereby dismissed for default of non-appearance of the plaintiff; and
52.In those circumstances there shall be no order as to costs.
Pronounced by me in the open Court, this the 05th day of September,
2017.
II Additional District Judge, Madanapalle.
Appendix of Evidence
Nil - -
II A. D. J,
Madanapalle.
Draft/Fair Judgment in
O.S. No. 66 / 2014
Dated 05.09.2017
39
IN THE COURT OF THE II ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE,
MADANAPALLE
Present :: Smt. K.V. Mahalakshmi,
II Additional District Judge,
Madanapalle.
Tuesday, the twenty ninth (29 th ) day of August, 2017.
ORIGINAL SUIT No.36/2017
Between:
1. B Nagaraja,
2. C. Balaraju … Plaintiffs
And:
6. D Sulai Baba,
7. D Jabibullah,
8. D Khadar Ilahi,
9. Nadella Vijaya Bhaskar,
10.Nadella Krishna Kumar,
11.B Venkataramana,
12.B Saroja,
13.B Lalitha,
14.S Gangi Reddy,
10. K.R. Ravindranath,
11. K. Suresh Babu,
12. K Harinatha Rao,
13. K. Raja Rao, … Defendants
This suit coming on this day for final disposal before me in the presence of Sri P. Ram Prasad, Advocate for Plaintiffs, and a memo is filed on behalf of the plaintiffs stating that this suit is not pressed and may be dismissed without costs, the court delivered the following:-
J U D G M E N T
53.Suit for partition in the suit survey number by allotting the suit extent of Ac.3.00 cents within specific metes and bounds infavour of 40 these plaintiffs by fixing up stones, in case of failure by the defendants, the same may be done by the court through process of law by passing preliminary and final decrees with delivery of possession infavour of these plaintiff and for costs.
54.A memo is filed on behalf of the plaintiffs stating that this suit is not pressed and may be dismissed without costs. Memo is recorded and this suit is hereby dismissed as not pressed.
55.In those circumstances there shall be no order as to costs.
Pronounced by me in the open Court, this the 29th day of August, 2017.
II Additional District Judge, Madanapalle.
Appendix of Evidence
Nil - -
II A. D. J,
Madanapalle.
Draft/Fair Judgment in
O.S. No. 36 / 2017
Dated 29.08.2017
41
IN THE COURT OF THE II ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE,
MADANAPALLE
Present :: Smt. K.V. Mahalakshmi,
II Additional District Judge,
Madanapalle.
Wednesday, the Second (02 nd ) day of August, 2017.
ORIGINAL SUIT No.74/2015
Between: Banduaru Venkat Praveen Kumar, … Plaintiff
And:
15.Boosetty Sujatha,
16.K Chandrakala,
17.Boosetty Sasi Kumar,
18.Sasi Kala,
19.R Jayakala,
20.Boosetty Vijay Kumar,
21.Boosetty Vijay Lakshmi,
22.Mulabagal Mohan Kumar,
23.Dr P.V. Prashanth, … Defendants
This suit coming on this day for final disposal before me in the presence of Sri S.V. Raghavan, Advocate for Plaintiff, and of Sri S
N.S.N. Prasad , Advocate for 9th Defendant, and the Defendants are set exparte and a memo is filed on behalf of the plaintiff stating that the plaintiff is not present the suit as withdrawn. Memo is recorded and this suit is hereby dismissed as not pressed, the court delivered the following:
J U D G M E N T
56.Suit for specific performance of an agreement of sale, directing the defendants to execute a regular registered sale deed in favour of plaintiff for the plaint schedule properties in pursuance of the agreement dated 03.01.1996 and if the defendants fails to execute a registered sale deed, the court may execute the registered sale deed in favour of plaintiff and for costs.
42
57.A memo is filed on behalf of the plaintiff stating that the plaintiff is not present the suit as withdrawn. Memo is recorded and this suit is hereby dismissed as not pressed.
58.In the circumstances there shall be no order as to costs.
Pronounced by me in the open Court, this the 02nd day of August, 2017.
II Additional District Judge, Madanapalle.
Appendix of Evidence
Nil - -
II A. D. J,
Madanapalle.
Draft/Fair Judgment in
O.S. No. 74 / 2015
Dated 02.08.2017
43
IN THE COURT OF THE II ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE,
MADANAPALLE
Present :: Smt. K.V. Mahalakshmi,
II Additional District Judge,
Madanapalle.
Friday, the Twenty eighth (28 th ) day of July, 2017.
ORIGINAL SUIT No.28/2014
Between: Ratakonda Ramesh Naidu … Plaintiff
And:
1. Pasupuleti Mohana Venkata Prasad @ P. Mohan,
2. Raavuri Srinivasulu, … Defendants
This suit coming on this day for final disposal before me in the presence of Sri M Chaithanya Kumar, Advocate for Plaintiffs and defendants are remained exparte and it is submitted by the counsel for plaintiff that party may be called. Plaintiff called absent. Hence this suit is hereby dismissed for default of non appearance of plaintiffs, this court delivered the following:-
J U D G M E N T
1. Suit to direct the defendants to execute the registered sale deed in favour of the plaintiff in respect of the suit schedule property after receiving the balance of the sale consideration of Rs.1,25,000/- within the time fixed by the court, failing which the same may be done by the court respect of the suit schedule property at the costs of the plaintiff and costs of the suit.
2. It is submitted by the counsel for plaintiff that party may be called.
Plaintiff called absent. Hence this suit is hereby dismissed for 44 default of non appearance of plaintiffs. In there circumstances there shall be no order as to costs.
Pronounced by me in the open Court, this the 28thday of July, 2017.
II Additional District Judge, Madanapalle.
Appendix of Evidence
Nil - -
II A. D. J,
Madanapalle.
Draft/Fair Judgment in
O.S. No. 28 / 2014
Dated 28.07.2017
45
IN THE COURT OF THE II ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE,
MADANAPALLE
Present :: Smt. K.V. Mahalakshmi,
II Additional District Judge,
Madanapalle.
Tuesday, the Eighteenth (18 th ) day of July, 2017.
ORIGINAL SUIT No.23/2015
Between:
1. Muddusetti Harshavardhan,
2. Muddusetti Bhanusri Sai, … Plaintiff's
And:
1.Muddusetti Subbarayudu,
2.Muddusetti Sankaraiah,
3.Muddusetti Venkata Sivaiah, … Defendants
This suit coming on this day for final disposal before me in the presence of Sri N. Reddynagulu, Advocate for Plaintiffs and Sri K
Manjunatha Reddy, and It is submitted by the counsel for plaintiff that parties may be called. Plaintiff called absent. Hence this suit is hereby dismissed for default of non appearance of plaintiffs, this court delivered the following:-
J U D G M E N T
3. Suit for partition into 9 equal shares in the plaint schedule property and to allot 2 shares to the plaintiffs by taking into good and bad qualities by metes and bounds and put to plaintiffs 2/9th share in their respective their separate possession and for costs of the suit.
4. The following issues are settled for trial:-
1. Whether the plaint schedule properties are the self acquisition of the parents of the defendants as contended by
D1 and D2 in their respective written statement ?
46
2. Whether the plaintiff is entitled to a preliminary decree of partition of the plaint schedule properties as prayed for?
3. To What relief ?
5. It is submitted by the counsel for plaintiff that parties may be called. Plaintiff called absent. Hence this suit is hereby dismissed for default of non appearance of plaintiffs. In there circumstances there shall be no order as to costs.
Pronounced by me in the open Court, this the 18thday of July, 2017.
II Additional District Judge, Madanapalle.
Appendix of Evidence
Nil - -
II A. D. J,
Madanapalle.
Draft/Fair Judgment in
O.S. No. 23 / 2015
Dated 18.07.2017
47
IN THE COURT OF THE II ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE,
MADANAPALLE
Present :: Smt. K.V. Mahalakshmi,
II Additional District Judge,
Madanapalle.
Monday, the Twentieth (20 th ) day of March, 2017.
ORIGINAL SUIT No.08/2012
Between:
3. S K Girish,
4. S.K. Harish, … Plaintiff's
And:
4.S. K. Lakshmi
5.Sakala Aruna
6.Sakala Aswarthanarayana
7.Sakala Mallikarjuna
8.Sakala Sampathamma
9.Sakala Puspha
10.Sakala meenakshi
11.Sakala Rama
12.Sakala Venkatesh Babu
10.Sakala Samantha
11.Sakala Jamuna
12.Sakala Sandhya Rani
13.Sakala Venkatarathnam
14.Sakala Venkatachalapathi
15.Sakala Sathish
16.Sakala Suresh
17.Sakala Rathnamma
18.Sakala Sulochana
19.Sakala Sujatha
20.Sakala Geetha
21.R Jayarami Reddy
22.Mekala Ramachandra Reddy
23.G Leelavathi
24.N Pradeep Reddy
25.M.R. Sumesh
26.M. Chowdi Reddy
27.S Venkatramana Reddy
28.Gadam Kadirappa
29.GaddamRamachandra
30.Irri narasamma … Defendants
This suit coming on this day for final disposal before me in the presence of Sri N.S.N. Prasad, Advocate for Plaintiffs and Sri S Rajendra,
Advocate for 9th Defendant, and Sri S. Ramachandra Reddy, Advocate for 48
D21, 22, 23, 25 and 26 and Sri S Kalimullah, Advocate for D24 and D27 and Defendants 1 to 8 and 10 to 20 are remaining exparte and Issues not settled. A memo is filed on behalf of the plaintiff stating that this matter is settled out of court. Memo is recorded and this suit is hereby dismissed as settled out of court, this court delivered the following:-
J U D G M E N T
6. Suit for partition and separate possession of plaintiff's 10/64th share in plaint schedule property and for costs of the suit.
7. Issues not settled. A memo is filed on behalf of the plaintiff stating that this matter is settled out of court. Memo is recorded and this suit is hereby dismissed as settled out of court. There shall be no order as to costs.
Pronounced by me in the open Court, this the 20thday of March,
2017.
II Additional District Judge, Madanapalle.
Appendix of Evidence
Nil - -
II A. D. J,
Madanapalle.
Draft/Fair Judgment in
O.S. No. 8 / 2012
Dated 20.03.2017
49
IN THE COURT OF THE II ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE,
MADANAPALLE
Present :: Smt. K.V. Mahalakshmi,
II Additional District Judge,
Madanapalle.
Monday, the Twenty Seventh (27 th ) day of March, 2017.
ORIGINAL SUIT No.101/2012
Between: Lankipalle Chayadevi … Plaintiff
And:
13.Managing Director, namely Vemuri Radhakrishna, Andhrajyothi Telugu Daily News Paper,
14.The Editor Namely K. Sreenivas, Regd. No. PMGK/TECH/TP-D-13, Andhra Jyothi Telugu Daily News Paper, Tirupathi.
15.The Chief Editor, Andhra Jyothi Telugu Daily News Paper, Tirupathi.
16.The Desk-in-charge, Andhra Jyothi Telugu Daily News Paper.
17.The News Reporter, Andhra Jyothi Telugu Daily News Paper, by name Sreenivasulu, Madanapalle.
18.The News Reporter, Andhra Jyothi Telugu Daily News Paper, by name Sreeramulu, Sreekalahasthi. … Defendants
This suit coming on this day for final disposal before me in the presence of Sri S Rajendra, Advocate for Plaintiff, and of Sri Sarasa
Subramanyam, Advocate for Defendants, it is submitted by the counsel for the plaintiff that party may be called. Plaintiff is called absent. Hence the suit is dismissed for default of non appearance of plaintiff, this court delivered the following:-
J U D G M E N T
50
8. Suit to direct the defendants to pay a sum of Rs.22,27,000/- towards compensation by way of damages with future interest at the rate of 18 % p.a and for costs of the suit.
9. The following issues are settled for trial:-
1. Whether the plaintiffs is entitled for the compensation against the defendants as claimed for ?
2. To What relief ?
3. it is submitted by the counsel for the plaintiff that party may be called. Plaintiff is called absent. Hence the suit is dismissed for default of non appearance of plaintiff. In there circumstances there shall be no order as to costs.
Pronounced by me in the open Court, this the 27thday of March,
2017.
II Additional District Judge, Madanapalle.
Appendix of Evidence
Nil - -
II A. D. J,
Madanapalle.
51
IN THE COURT OF THE II ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE, MADANAPALLE
Present : Dr. S.S.S.Jaya Raju., II Additional District Judge, Madanapalle.
Monday, the Eight (08th) day of December, Two thousand and fourteen.
ORIGINAL SUIT No. 71 / 2013
Between: Nadipi Sreekanth Reddy s/o Kumaraswamy Reddy, aged about 30 years, Hindu, residing at Vemana Veedhi, Madanapalle town and post and Mandal, Chittoor District. … Plaintiff
And: Sanku Sucharitha w/o Late Subbanna, aged about 60 years,Hindu,residingatD.No.3-3-10, Bavanarayanaswamypet, Ponnur town, post and Mandal, Guntur District. … Defendant This suit coming on this day for final disposal before me in in the presence of Sri Nadipi Sreekanth Reddylu, Party in Person, and the Defendant having remaind expart, plaintiff in person filed a memo on 14-11-2014 to dismiss the suit, as the matter settled out of Court, this court delivered the following:
J U D G M E N T
1. Suit for Mortgage, directing the defendant to pay the suit amount together with interest thereon at the rate of 24% p.a. on Rs.13,24,666/- from the date of the suit till the date of realization within the time fixed by the Court for redemption in the event of the defendant failing to make payment of the amount due within the time fixed by the Court, the plaint schedule property be brought to be realized to pay to the plaintiff as per law with future interest and for costs.
2. Defendant exparte.
3. Plaintiff in person filed a memo on 14.11.2014 to dismiss the suit. Memo recorded. Accordingly, suit is dismissed as prayed.
Pronounced by me in the open Court, this the 8th day of
December, 2014.
II Additional
District Judge,
Madanapalle. Appendix of Evidence
Nil - - 52
II A. D. J,
Madanapalle.
Draft/Fair Judgment in
O.S. No. 71 / 2013
Dated 08.12.2014
53
IN THE COURT OF THE II ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE, MADANAPALLE
Present : Dr. S.S.S.Jaya Raju., II Additional District Judge, Madanapalle.
Monday, the Eight (08th) day of December, Two thousand and fourteen.
ORIGINAL SUIT No. 71 / 2013
Between: Nadipi Sreekanth Reddy s/o Kumaraswamy Reddy, aged about 30 years, Hindu, residing at Vemana Veedhi, Madanapalle town and post and Mandal, Chittoor District. … Plaintiff
And: Sanku Sucharitha w/o Late Subbanna, aged about 60 years,Hindu,residingatD.No.3-3-10, Bavanarayanaswamypet, Ponnur town, post and Mandal, Guntur District. … Defendant This suit coming on this day for final disposal before me in in the presence of Sri Nadipi Sreekanth Reddylu, Party in Person, and the Defendant having remaind expart, plaintiff in person filed a memo on 14-11-2014 to dismiss the suit, as the matter settled out of Court, this court delivered the following:
J U D G M E N T
4. Suit for Mortgage, directing the defendant to pay the suit amount together with interest thereon at the rate of 24% p.a. on Rs.13,24,666/- from the date of the suit till the date of realization within the time fixed by the Court for redemption in the event of the defendant failing to make payment of the amount due within the time fixed by the Court, the plaint schedule property be brought to be realized to pay to the plaintiff as per law with future interest and for costs.
5. Defendant exparte.
6. Plaintiff in person filed a memo on 14.11.2014 to dismiss the suit. Memo recorded. Accordingly, suit is dismissed as prayed.
Pronounced by me in the open Court, this the 8th day of
December, 2014.
II Additional District Judge, Madanapalle. Appendix of Evidence
Nil - -
II A. D. J,
Madanapalle.
54
Draft/Fair Judgment in
O.S. No. 71 / 2013
Dated 08.12.2014
IN THE COURT OF THE II ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE, MADANAPALLE
Present : Dr. S.S.S.Jaya Raju., II Additional District Judge, Madanapalle.
Friday, the Nineteenth (19th) day of June, Two thousand and fourteen.
ORIGINAL SUIT No. 68 / 2012 Between: Galla Govindamma, … Plaintiff
And:
1. Galla Gangadharam Naidu,
2. Galla Nalini,
3. Galla Satheesh, … Defendants This suit coming on this day for final disposal before me in the presence of Sri K Jitendra, Advocate for Plaintiff, and of Sri S Vidya Sagar, Advocate for 2nd Defendant, and the 1st Defendant having remained ex parte, and the plaintiff counsel filed a memo on not pressing the suit, as the matter settled out of Court, this court delivered the following:
J U D G M E N T
1. Suit to declare the right, title, possession and enjoyment of the plaintiff over the plaint schedule property together with grant of permanent injunction restraining the defendants not to interfere with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the plaint schedule property by virtue of the will dated 23-12-1991 executed by late Galla Chinna Reddeppa Naidu in favour of the plaintiff and costs.
2. Defendants 2 and 3 set ex-parte.
3. At this stage memo filed by the counsel for plaintiff that the case is settled out the Court and not pressing the suit. Notice also given to other side when endorse no objection. Heard both sides. In view of the memo, the suit is dismissed as prayed without costs.
Pronounced by me in the open Court, this the 19th day of
June, 2014.
II Additional
District Judge,
Madanapalle. Appendix of Evidence
Nil - - 55
II A. D. J,
Madanapalle.
Draft/Fair Judgment in
O.S. No. 68 / 2012
Dated 07.11.2012
IN THE COURT OF THE II ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE, MADANAPALLE
Present : Dr. S.S.S.Jaya Raju., II Additional District Judge, Madanapalle. Wednesday, the Thirteenth (13th) day of August, Two thousand and fourteen.
ORIGINAL SUIT No. 68 / 2011 Between:
1. V. Ramesh,
2. V. Sreedevi, … Plaintiffs
And:
1. G. Krishnaiah,
2. G. Sreedevi,
3. The Branch Manager, Indian Bank, Punganur Branch, Punganur. … Defendants This suit coming on this day before me in the presence of Sri B. Bhujanga Rao, Advocate for Plaintiffs, Sri K. Sreedhar, Advocate for 1st & 2nd Defendants, and the 3rd Defendant having remained ex party. Both parties filed a memo to dismiss the suit, as the matter is settled out of Court, this court delivered the following:
J U D G M E N T
1. Suit for dissolution of the firm M/s. Sreedevi Industries situated in Sino.12/2 of Kondasamudram village of Kummarathanam Gram Panchayat, Punganur Mandal and direct the defendants 1 and 2 for settlement of account relating to the said firm, commencing from December, 2009 till the date of dissolution of the above said firm and direct the Defendants 1 and 2 to pay the share of profits, capitals invested by the plaintiffs after verifying the accounts as per the provisions of Chapter VI of the Partnership Act, 1932 and costs.
2. In this case joint memo filed by the contending parties. The learned counsels submitted in view of the compromise effected between contending parties and a memo filed to that extent, they prayed to dismiss the suit. Perused the memo and noted its contents. Since both parties and their counsels signed on a memo requesting the Court to dismiss the suit no. 68/2011. Since the matter is settled outside the Court. The memo is recorded. In the result suit is dismissed as prayed.
Pronounced by me in the open Court, this the 13th day of August,
2014.
II Additional District Judge, Madanapalle.
56
Appendix of Evidence
Nil -
II A. D. J,
Madanapalle. Draft/Fair Judgment in
O.S. No. 68 / 2011
Dated 13.08.2014.
57
IN THE COURT OF THE II ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE, MADANAPALLE
Present : Dr. S.S.S.Jaya Raju., II Additional District Judge, Madanapalle.
Friday, the Seventeenth (17th) day of April, Two thousand and fifteen.
ORIGINAL SUIT No. 106 / 2011 Between: Chintala Sahadeva Reddy, … Plaintiff
And:
24.Thimmampalli Padmavathamma,
25.Thimmampalli Chandrachari,
26.Thimmapalli Venugopalachari,
27.Thimmampalli Kamala,
28.Thimmampalli Neelamma, … Defendants This suit coming on this day for final disposal before me in the presence of Sri Y Samba Siva Reddy, Advocate for Plaintiff, and of
Sri S Rajendra, Advocate for Defendants, and the costs not paid and the Plaintiff called absent and Counsel reposted no instructions, the court delivered the following:
J U D G M E N T
59.Suit for specific performance of an agreement of sale dated 28- 07-2008 executed by the defendants 1 to 5 in favour of plaintiff for
Rs.30,00,000/- and for costs.
60.The following issues are settled for trial :-
1. Whether the agreements dated 28.07.2008 executed by the defendants is true, valid and binding on them in terms of contents of agreement ?
2. Whether the plaintiff is entitled for the reliefs against the defendants as prayed for ?
3. To What Relief ?
61.Costs not paid. Plaintiff called absent. Counsel reported no instructions. For default suit is dismissed.
Pronounced by me in the open Court, this the 17th day of April,
2015.
58
II Additional
District Judge,
Madanapalle. Appendix of Evidence
Nil - -
II A. D. J,
Madanapalle.
Draft/Fair Judgment in
O.S. No. 106 / 2011
Dated 17.04.2015
59
IN THE COURT OF THE II ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE, MADANAPALLE
Present : Dr. S.S.S.Jaya Raju., II Additional District Judge, Madanapalle.
Tuesday, the Thirtyfirst (31st) day of March, Two thousand and fifteen.
ORIGINAL SUIT No. 01 / 2013 Between: B Reddeppa, … Plaintiff
And: P. Venkateswar Rao, … Defendant This suit coming on this day for final disposal before me in the presence of Sri R. Narayana Reddy, Advocate for Plaintiff, and of Sri S Ramgopal Rao, Advocate for Defendant, plaintiff called absent. No representation on behalf of plaintiff as counsel reported no instructions. Cost not paid. Proof affidavit not filed. For default suit is dismissed, this court delivered the following:
J U D G M E N T
1. Suit to direct the defendant to execute a registered sale deed conveying the plaint schedule property in favour of the plaint schedule property in favour of the plaintiff and deliver possession of the same within time to be fixed by this Hon’ble Court failing which the same may be done through process of law and costs.
2. Plaintiff called absent. No representation on behalf of plaintiff as counsel reported no instructions. Cost not paid. Proof affidavit not filed. For default suit is dismissed.
Pronounced by me in the open Court, this the 31stday of March,
2015.
II Additional
District Judge,
Madanapalle. Appendix of Evidence
Nil - -
II A. D. J,
Madanapalle.
Draft/Fair Judgment in
O.S. No. 01 / 2013
60
Dated 31.03.2015
IN THE COURT OF THE II ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE, MADANAPALLE
Present : Dr. S.S.S.Jaya Raju., II Additional District Judge, Madanapalle.
Tuesday, the Twenty fourth (24th ) day of March, Two thousand and fifteen.
ORIGINAL SUIT No. 40 / 2013 Between: G Natesh Kumar, … Plaintiff
And:
1. K Kanakaraju,
2. N. Chandra Sekhar Reddy, … Defendants This suit coming on this day for final disposal before me in the presence of Sri K Jitendra, Advocate for Plaintiff, and of Sri V Jayanarayana Reddy, Advocate for Defendants, PW1 absent. Plaintiff called absent. No representation in spite of conditional Order and imposing costs in an identified case. Cost also not paid. Advocate abstained Court. For default suit is dismissed, this court delivered the following:
J U D G M E N T
1. Suit for recovery of rs.10,18,160/- being the chit amount and interest on Rs.7,80,000/- at 24% p.a. from 14-2-2012 to 22-5- 2013 with future interest at 24% p.a. on Rs.7,80,000/- and costs.
2. The following issues are settled for trial :-
1. Whether the plaintiff is entitled to recover the suit amount from the defendants as prayed for ?
2. To What Relief ?
3.PW1 absent. Plaintiff called absent. No representation in spite of conditional Order and imposing costs in an identified case. Cost also not paid. Advocate abstained Court. For default suit is dismissed.
Pronounced by me in the open Court, this the 24thday of March,
2015.
II Additional
District Judge,
Madanapalle. Appendix of Evidence 61
Nil - -
II A. D. J,
Madanapalle.
Draft/Fair Judgment in
O.S. No. 40 / 2013
Dated 24.03.2015
62
IN THE COURT OF THE II ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE, MADANAPALLE
Present : Dr. S.S.S.Jaya Raju., II Additional District Judge, Madanapalle.
Monday, the Ninth (09th ) day of March, Two thousand and fifteen.
ORIGINAL SUIT No. 93 / 2011 Between:
1. S. Masthan Valli,
2. S. Sayed Basha, … Plaintiffs
And:
1. S. Mahaboob Basha,
2. S. Shabeer Hussan, … Defendants This suit coming on this day for final disposal before me in the presence of Sri A.V.Siva Kumar Reddy, Advocate for Plaintiffs, and of Sri S. Karemulla, Advocate for Defendants, plaintiff called absent. No representation. Costs not paid. For default suit is dismissed, this court delivered the following:
J U D G M E N T
1. Suit to declare the plaintiffs right and title over to the plaint schedule property and direct the defendants to deliver possession of the same and for costs.
2. The following issues are settled for trial :-
1. Whether the Decree & Judgment in O.S.No.48/1980 is finding upon the plaintiff ?
2. Whether Principles of jurisdiction is applicable to the facts of the case?
3. Whether the plaintiffs can maintain the suit against issue and lawful owners?
4. Whether the plaintiffs are having right and title upon the suit schedule property?
5. Whether the plaintiffs are entitled for deliver possession of the suit schedule property from the defendant?
6. To What Relief ?
63
3. Plaintiff called absent. No representation. Costs not paid. For default suit is dismissed.
Pronounced by me in the open Court, this the 09thday of March,
2015.
II Additional
District Judge,
Madanapalle. Appendix of Evidence
Nil - -
II A. D. J,
Madanapalle.
Draft/Fair Judgment in
O.S. No. 93 / 2011
Dated 09.03.2015
64
IN THE COURT OF THE II ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE, MADANAPALLE
Present : Dr. S.S.S.Jaya Raju., II Additional District Judge, Madanapalle.
Wednesday, the Twenty second (22nd ) day of April, Two thousand and fifteen.
ORIGINAL SUIT No. 38 / 2013 Between:
1. B.L. Keerthi Sudha,
2. B.L. Jaya Shyam, … Plaintiffs
And:
1. B.L. Dwarkanath,
2. B.L. Syamala,
3. B.L. Nalini Priya,
4. B.L. Lokesh Krishna,
5. Syed Huzahath Nafeesa, … Defendants This suit coming on this day for final disposal before me in the presence of Sri A.V.Siva Kumar Reddy, Advocate for Plaintiffs, and of Sri M.R. Sekhar Naidu, Advocate for Defendants 2 to 4, 1st and 5th
Defendants, having remained ex parte. Plaintiff called absent. No representation. PW1 also called absent and plaintiffs are not evincing interest to commenced trial in this identified case. For default suit is dismissed, this court delivered the following:
J U D G M E N T
1. Suit filed for partition of plaint schedule property into six equal shares by metes and bounds taking good and bad into consideration and to allot two such shares to plaintiffs within time specified by the Court and for costs.
2. The following issues are settled for trial :-
1. Whether the suit is bad for mis-joinder of un-necessary parties?
2. Whether the plaintiffs are entitled to decree against these defendants as prayed for?
3. To What Relief ?
65
3. Plaintiff called absent. No representation. PW1 also called absent and plaintiffs are not evincing interest to commenced trial in this identified case. For default suit is dismissed.
Pronounced by me in the open Court, this the 22ndday of April,
2015.
II Additional
District Judge,
Madanapalle. Appendix of Evidence
Nil - -
II A. D. J,
Madanapalle.
Draft/Fair Judgment in
O.S. No. 38 / 2013
Dated 22.04.2015
66
IN THE COURT OF THE II ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE, MADANAPALLE
Present : Dr. S.S.S.Jaya Raju., II Additional District Judge, Madanapalle.
Thursday, the Twenty sixth (26th ) day of March, Two thousand and fifteen.
ORIGINAL SUIT No. 24 / 2012 Between: Boyapati Venkata Reddy, … Plaintiff
And:
1. Nadella Vasundaramma,
2. Boyapati Lakshmikanthamma, … Defendants This suit coming on this day for final disposal before me in the presence of Sri G. Janardhan Reddy, Advocate for Plaintiff, and of Sri S. Rajendra, Advocate for 1st Defendant, and of Sri G. Maddi Reddy, Advocate for 2nd Defendant. Plaintiff called absent. No representation in identified case. Cost not paid. Proof affidavit not filed. For default suit is dismissed, this court delivered the following:
J U D G M E N T
1 Suit for partition and divide the plaint schedule property into four equal shares by metes and bounds taking good and bad into consideration and allotment of two such shares to plaintiff and for costs.
2 Plaintiff called absent. No representation in identified case. Cost not paid. Proof affidavit not filed. For default suit is dismissed.
Pronounced by me in the open Court, this the 26thday of March,
2015.
II Additional
District Judge,
Madanapalle. Appendix of Evidence
Nil - -
II A. D. J,
Madanapalle.
Draft/Fair Judgment in 67
O.S. No. 24 / 2012
Dated 26.03.2015
IN THE COURT OF THE II ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE, MADANAPALLE
Present : Dr. S.S.S.Jaya Raju., II Additional District Judge, Madanapalle.
Thursday, the Twenty sixth (26th ) day of March, Two thousand and fifteen.
ORIGINAL SUIT No. 61 / 2012 Between:
1. Derangula Reddeppa,
2. Syed Issak, … Plaintiffs
And:
1. Shaik Fhathimunnisa,
2. Shaik Khamar Basha,
3. Shaik Javeed Basha,
4. Shaik Jamsheera Banu, … Defendants This suit coming on this day for final disposal before me in the presence of Sri M.R. Sekhar Naidu, Advocate for Plaintiffs, and of
Sri B. Amarnatha Reddy, Advocate for Defendants, and the in spite of conditional Order, Plaintiff is not evincing interest to commence trial in and Identified case, the court delivered the following:
J U D G M E N T
1. Suit for recovery of money of Rs.10,00,000/- with interest at 24% p.a. from the defendants and for costs.
2. The following issues are settled for trial:-
1. Whether the sale agreement dated 16.5.2012 is true, valid and binding on the defendants ?
2. Whether the defendants 1 to 3 have executed General
Power of Attorney in favour of one Shaik Kadharvalli ?
3. Whether the plaintiffs are entitled for the suit claim as prayed for ?
4. To What relief ?
3. Plaintiff called absent. No representation. Advocates abstained
Court. Costs not paid. In spite of conditional Order, Plaintiff is 68 not evincing interest to commence trial in an Identified case.
For default suit is dismissed.
Pronounced by me in the open Court, this the 26thday of March,
2015.
II Additional
District Judge,
Madanapalle. Appendix of Evidence
Nil - -
II A. D. J,
Madanapalle.
Draft/Fair Judgment in
O.S. No. 61 / 2012
Dated 26.03.2015
69
IN THE COURT OF THE II ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE, MADANAPALLE
Present : Dr. S.S.S.Jaya Raju., II Additional District Judge, Madanapalle.
Thursday, the Twenty sixth (26th ) day of March, Two thousand and fifteen.
ORIGINAL SUIT No. 24 / 2012 Between: Boyapati Venkata Reddy, … Plaintiff
And:
3. Nadella Vasundaramma,
4. Boyapati Lakshmikanthamma, … Defendants This suit coming on this day for final disposal before me in the presence of Sri G. Janardhan Reddy, Advocate for Plaintiff, and of Sri S. Rajendra, Advocate for 1st Defendant, and of Sri G. Maddi Reddy, Advocate for 2nd Defendant. Plaintiff called absent. No representation in identified case. Cost not paid. Proof affidavit not filed. For default suit is dismissed, this court delivered the following:
J U D G M E N T
3 Suit for partition and divide the plaint schedule property into four equal shares by metes and bounds taking good and bad into consideration and allotment of two such shares to plaintiff and for costs.
4 Plaintiff called absent. No representation in identified case. Cost not paid. Proof affidavit not filed. For default suit is dismissed.
Pronounced by me in the open Court, this the 26thday of March,
2015.
II Additional
District Judge,
Madanapalle. Appendix of Evidence
Nil - -
II A. D. J,
Madanapalle.
Draft/Fair Judgment in 70
O.S. No. 24 / 2012
Dated 26.03.2015
IN THE COURT OF THE II ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE, MADANAPALLE
Present : Dr. S.S.S.Jaya Raju., II Additional District Judge, Madanapalle.
Thursday, the Thirteenth (13th ) day of March, Two thousand and fourteen.
ORIGINAL SUIT No. 24 / 2012 Between: Boyapati Venkata Reddy, … Plaintiff
And:
5. Nadella Vasundaramma,
6. Boyapati Lakshmikanthamma, … Defendants This suit coming on this day for final disposal before me in the presence of Sri G. Janardhan Reddy, Advocate for Plaintiff, and of Sri S. Rajendra, Advocate for 1st Defendant, and of Sri G. Maddi Reddy, Advocate for 2nd Defendant. Plaintiff called absent. No representation in identified case. Cost not paid. Proof affidavit not filed. For default suit is dismissed, this court delivered the following:
J U D G M E N T
5 Suit for partition and divide the plaint schedule property into four equal shares by metes and bounds taking good and bad into consideration and allotment of two such shares to plaintiff and for costs.
6 Plaintiff called absent. No representation in identified case. Cost not paid. Proof affidavit not filed. For default suit is dismissed.
Pronounced by me in the open Court, this the 26thday of March,
2015.
II Additional
District Judge,
Madanapalle. Appendix of Evidence
Nil - -
II A. D. J,
Madanapalle.
71
Draft/Fair Judgment in
O.S. No. 24 / 2012
Dated 26.03.2015
IN THE COURT OF THE II ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE, MADANAPALLE
Present : Dr. S.S.S.Jaya Raju., II Additional District Judge, Madanapalle.
Thursday, the Thirteenth (13th ) day of March, Two thousand and fourteen.
ORIGINAL SUIT No. 16 / 2012 Between:
1. Ratakonda Vijaya Lakshmi,
2. Ratakonda Sandhya Rani,
3. Ratakonda Girish Babu, … Plaintiff
And:
1. Gangarapu Prabhakar Naidu,
2. Kalluri Pushpha,
3. Kondreddi Narayanamma,
4. Garla Nirmalamma,
5. Varanasi padmavathi,
6. Yerragudi Suresh Kumar Reddy,
7. Banavath Sarada,
8. Munagamakulapalle Mangamma,
9. Jarra Sreenivasulu,
10.Rachapallu Chaithanya Gupta,
11.Maddipatla Venkatamma,
12.Marpuri Syamalamma,
13.Syed Bavajan,
14.Sonikanti Chennappa,
15.S.N. Hanumanthu, … Defendants This suit coming on this day for final disposal before me in the presence of Sri N.S.N. Prasad, Advocate for Plaintiffs, and of Sri
Sarasa Subramanyam Advocate for 1st Defendant, and of Sri A. Phani,
Advocate for 4th Defendant. D2, D3, D5 to D8, D9, D10 to D15 having remained ex-parte. I.A. filed. Memo filed. The O.S. is advance to this date basing on the memo and petition to enable the plaintiff to close the proceedings. In the light of the memo filed by petitioner, this court delivered the following:
J U D G M E N T
1. Suit for declaration of the plaintiff right and title in the extent shown as A B C D E F G G1 H I J K L L1 in the plaint plan and 72 described in the Plaint B Schedule and for delivery of possession of the same after removal of the constructions made by the Defendants 2 to 15, for Mandatory Injunction for removal of the constructions made by the Defendants 2 to 15 in the extents shown as A B C D E For G G1 Have I J K L L1 measuring Ac.0.65.25 cents in the plaint plan described in the plaint B schedule and for declaration of the plaintiffs right and title in the vacant site shown as A N O P Q Are S U V Y X Z Z1
For G G1 Have I J K L1 LM measuring Ac.0.90.75 cents in the plaint plan and described in the plaint C schedule and for consequential relief of permanent injunction for restraining the 1st defendant from executing documents in favour of the 3rd parties. 26-04-2012 and for costs.
2. I.A. filed. Memo filed. The O.S. is advance to this date basing on the memo and petition to enable the plaintiff to close the proceedings. In the light of the memo filed by petitioner. For default suit is dismissed.
Pronounced by me in the open Court, this the 13th day of March,
2015.
II Additional
District Judge,
Madanapalle. Appendix of Evidence
Nil - -
II A. D. J,
Madanapalle.
73
Draft/Fair Judgment in
O.S. No. 16 / 2012
Dated 13.03.2015
74
IN THE COURT OF THE II ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE, MADANAPALLE
Present : Dr. S.S.S.Jaya Raju., II Additional District Judge, Madanapalle.
Tuesday, the Twenty third (23rd ) day of June, Two thousand and fifteen.
ORIGINAL SUIT No. 73 / 2011 Between: Ratakonda Prasad, … Plaintiff
And: Boyapati Raghu, … Defendant This suit coming on this day for final disposal before me in the presence of Sri A. Arun Kumar, Advocate for Plaintiff, and of Sri J. Ganapathi, Advocate for Defendant, both side filed joint memo and the suit is settled outside the Court and FS memo filed, the court delivered the following:
J U D G M E N T
1. Suit for recovery of money of Rs.10,32,000/- with interest at 24% p.a. from the defendants and for costs.
2. The following issues are settled for trial:-
1. Whether the promissory note dated 5.9.2008 is true, valid and binding upon the defendant ?
2. Whether the suit pronote is a forged and fabricated document ?
3. To What relief ?
3. Both side filed joint memo and the suit is settled outside the Court and FS memo filed. In the result suit is dismissed as prayed..
Pronounced by me in the open Court, this the 23rdday of June,
2015.
II Additional
District Judge,
Madanapalle. Appendix of Evidence
Nil - -
II A. D. J,
Madanapalle.
75
Draft/Fair Judgment in
O.S. No. 73 / 2011
Dated 23.06.2015
IN THE COURT OF THE II ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE, MADANAPALLE
Present : Dr. S.S.S.Jaya Raju., II Additional District Judge, Madanapalle.
Thursday, the second (02nd ) day of July, Two thousand and fifteen.
ORIGINAL SUIT No. 02 / 2014 Between:
1. Sundupalli Nagarathna,
2. S. Sree Vidya,
3. S. Sreekanth, … Plaintiffs
And:
1. Sundupalli Sreenivasulu, … Defendant This suit coming on this day for final disposal before me in the presence of Sri Y.V. Sesha Reddy, Advocate for Plaintiffs, and of Sri K. Jitendra, Advocate for Defendant, plaintiffs called absent. Counsel for plaintiff reported no instructions. Plaintiffs are not present, the court delivered the following:
J U D G M E N T
1. Suit to create a charge on the plaint schedule property for the recovery of the suit amount of Rs.15,42,000/- direct the defendant to pay future maintenance at the of Rs.7,000/- per month each to 1st plaintiff, till marriage of 2nd plaintiff and 3rd plaintiff till he attaining majority and for costs.
2. The following issues are settled for trial:-
1. Whether the plaintiffs are entitled for the suit claim from the defendant as claimed for ?
2. To What relief ?
3. Plaintiffs called absent. Counsel for plaintiff reported no instructions. Plaintiffs are not present. For default suit is dismissed.
Pronounced by me in the open Court, this the 02nd day of July,
2015.
II Additional
District Judge,
Madanapalle. Appendix of Evidence 76
Nil - -
II A. D. J,
Madanapalle.
Draft/Fair Judgment in
O.S. No. 02 / 2014
Dated 02.07.2015
IN THE COURT OF THE II ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE, MADANAPALLE
Present : Dr. S.S.S.Jaya Raju., II Additional District Judge, Madanapalle.
Monday, the twentieth (20th ) day of July, Two thousand and fifteen.
ORIGINAL SUIT No. 82 / 2012 Between:
1. Nagirepalle Krishna Reddy, … Plaintiff
And:
1. Nagirimadugu Rama Devi,
2. Gundluru Gangadhar Reddy,
3. Potukanuma Chenga Reddy, … Defendants This suit coming on this day for final disposal before me in the presence of Sri N.S.N. Prasad, Advocate for Plaintiff, and of Sri Y V Sesha Reddy, Advocate for Defendants, plaintiff called absent. No costs paid in spite of conditional Order. Counsel reposted no instructions, the court delivered the following:
J U D G M E N T
1. Suit to direct the defendants or such as the defendants to receive the balance of sale consideration amount of Rs.53,52,000/- and to execute a registered sale deed in favour of the plaintiff in respect of the plaint schedule property and if they fails to do so, a sale deed may be executed and registered through process of law after the deposit of the balance of the sale consideration amount and costs.
2. Plaintiff called absent. No costs paid in spite of conditional Order. Counsel reposted no instructions. For default of non- payment of costs and non-appearance of plaintiff/PW1 suit is dismissed.
Pronounced by me in the open Court, this the 20th day of July,
2015.
II Additional
District Judge,
Madanapalle. Appendix of Evidence 77
Nil - -
II A. D. J,
Madanapalle.
Draft/Fair Judgment in
O.S. No. 82 / 2012
Dated 20.07.2015
IN THE COURT OF THE II ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE, MADANAPALLE
Present : Dr. S.S.S.Jaya Raju., II Additional District Judge, Madanapalle.
Thursday, the Thirtaith (30th ) day of July, Two thousand and fifteen.
ORIGINAL SUIT No. 73 / 2011 Between: Ratakonda Prasad, … Plaintiff
And: Boyapati Raghu, … Defendant This suit coming on this day for final disposal before me in the presence of Sri A. Arun Kumar, Advocate for Plaintiff, and of Sri J. Ganapathi, Advocate for Defendant, both side filed joint memo and the suit is settled outside the Court and FS memo filed, the court delivered the following:
J U D G M E N T
4. Suit for recovery of money of Rs.10,32,000/- with interest at 24% p.a. from the defendants and for costs.
5. The following issues are settled for trial:-
4. Whether the promissory note dated 5.9.2008 is true, valid and binding upon the defendant ?
5. Whether the suit pronote is a forged and fabricated document ?
6. To What relief ?
6. Both side filed joint memo and the suit is settled outside the Court and FS memo filed. In the result suit is dismissed as prayed..
Pronounced by me in the open Court, this the 23rdday of June,
2015.
II Additional
District Judge,
78
Madanapalle. Appendix of Evidence
Nil - -
II A. D. J,
Madanapalle.
Draft/Fair Judgment in
O.S. No. 73 / 2011
Dated 23.06.2015
IN THE COURT OF THE II ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE, MADANAPALLE
Present : Dr. S.S.S.Jaya Raju., II Additional District Judge, Madanapalle.
Thursday, the Thirtieth (30th ) day of July, Two thousand and fifteen.
ORIGINAL SUIT No. 19 / 2011 Between: B. Reddeppa Reddy, … Plaintiff
And: G. Ashok Kumar @ G. Ashok, … Defendant This suit coming on this day for final disposal before me in the presence of Sri S. Kamalulla Basha, Advocate for Plaintiff, and of Sri C.R. Reddeppa Reddy, Advocate for Defendant, plaintiff called absent. Counsel for plaintiff reported no instructions, the court delivered the following:
J U D G M E N T
1. Suit for recovery of Rs.14,17,373/- being the principal and interest due on a pronote dated 30.12.2007 executed by the defendant in favour of plaintiff for Rs.8,25,000/- repayable with interest at 24% p.a. from the defendant and for costs.
2. The following issues are settled for trial:-
1. Whether the plaintiff is entitled to suit claim ?
2. To What relief ?
3. Plaintiff called absent. Counsel for plaintiff reported no instructions. For default suit is dismissed.
Pronounced by me in the open Court, this the 30thday of July,
2015.
79
II Additional
District Judge,
Madanapalle. Appendix of Evidence
Nil - -
II A. D. J,
Madanapalle.
Draft/Fair Judgment in
O.S. No. 19 / 2011
Dated 30.07.2015
80
IN THE COURT OF THE II ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE, MADANAPALLE
Present : Dr. S.S.S.Jaya Raju., II Additional District Judge, Madanapalle.
Thursday, the sixth (06th ) day of August, Two thousand and fifteen.
ORIGINAL SUIT No. 79 / 2013 Between: Lankipalli Reddeppa Naidu, … Plaintiff
And: K. Subba lakshmamma, … Defendant This suit coming on this day for final disposal before me in the presence of Sri S. Badrinath Guptha, Advocate for Plaintiff, and of Sri K.M.Kalimullah, Advocate for Defendant, PW1 is absent in spite of conditional Order and imposing costs and directing to face cross examination, the court delivered the following:
J U D G M E N T
1. Suit to direct the defendant to receive the balance of sale consideration amount of Rs.17,15,120/- and to execute a registered sale deed in favour of the plaintiff in respect of the plaint schedule plots and if she fails to do so the registered sale deed may be executed through process of law after deposit of the balance of the sale consideration amount and for costs.
2. The following issues are settled for trial:-
1. Whether the plaintiff is entitled for reliefs against the defendant as prayed for ?
2. To What relief ?
3. PW1 is absent in spite of conditional Order and imposing costs and directing to face cross examination. For default the suit is dismissed an it appearance plaintiff is not intervening to peruse the suit.
Pronounced by me in the open Court, this the 06thday of August,
2015.
II Additional
District Judge,
Madanapalle. Appendix of Evidence
Nil - - 81
II A. D. J,
Madanapalle.
Draft/Fair Judgment in
O.S. No. 79 / 2013
Dated 06.08.2015
82
IN THE COURT OF THE II ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE, MADANAPALLE
Present : Dr. S.S.S.Jaya Raju., II Additional District Judge, Madanapalle.
Thursday, the sixth (06th ) day of August, Two thousand and fifteen.
ORIGINAL SUIT No. 86 / 2013 Between: P. Bhaskar Reddy, … Plaintiff
And:
1. M. Venkatanarayana Reddy,
2. M. Viswanatha Reddy,
3. Pagadala Murali Mohan,
4. M. Ramesh Babu, … Defendants This suit coming on this day for final disposal before me in the presence of Sri P. Pal Reddy and Sri A. Mohan Kumar, Advocates for Plaintiff, and of Sri C.R. Reddeppa Reddy, Advocate for Defendants, plaintiff called absent no representation. Plaintiff is not evincing interest since 14.11.2014. it appears plaintiff is not interested to peruse the suit, the court delivered the following:
J U D G M E N T
1. Suit to direct the defendant to receive the balance of sale consideration amount of Rs.41,10,000/- from the plaintiff and to execute a registered sale deed in favour of the plaintiff in respect of the suit schedule landed property; and to grant permanent injunction restraining the defendants from executing any sort of documents in favour of 3rd parties and for costs.
2. The following issues are settled for trial:-
1. Whether the plaintiff has performed his part of contract in pursuance of agreement of sale dated 24.10.2012 ?
2. Whether the plaintiff is entitled for the reliefs against the defendants as claimed for ?
3. To What relief ?
3. Plaintiff called absent no representation. Plaintiff is not evincing interest since 14.11.2014. it appears plaintiff is not interested to peruse the suit. For default suit is dismissed.
Pronounced by me in the open Court, this the 06thday of August,
2015.
II Additional
District Judge,
83
Madanapalle. Appendix of Evidence
Nil - -
II A. D. J,
Madanapalle.
Draft/Fair Judgment in
O.S. No. 86 / 2013
Dated 06.08.2015
84
IN THE COURT OF THE II ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE, MADANAPALLE
Present : Dr. S.S.S.Jaya Raju., II Additional District Judge, Madanapalle.
Monday, the seventeenth (17th ) day of August, Two thousand and fifteen.
ORIGINAL SUIT No. 45 / 2014 Between:
1. Aluganti Chowdi Reddy,
2. Aluganti Venkatramana Reddy,
3. Aramadaka Bharathamma, … Plaintiffs
And:
1. Rachapalle Pedda Ramanaiah,
2. Rachapalle Chinna Ramanaiah,
3. Rachapalle Pedda Reddeppa,
4. Rachapalle Chinnappa,
5. Rachapalle Reddeppa,
6. Rachapalle Venkatramana,
7. Ramapuram Narasimhulu, … Defendants This suit coming on this day for final disposal before me in the presence of Sri G.M. Reddy Advocate for Plaintiffs, and of Sri G.
Nagabhusana Reddy, Advocate for Defendant No.1, and of Sri C Sanjay
Kumar, Advocate for Defendant No.6, D2 to D5, and D7 having remained ex-parte, plaintiff called absent no representation in spite of conditional Order, this court delivered the following:-
J U D G M E N T
10.Suit to declare the Registered General Power of Attorney,
dated 15.02.2013 executed by the defendants 1 to 6 in favour
of the 7th defendant in respect of the plaint schedule properties as null, void, inoperative in the eye of law and for costs of the suit.
11.The following issues are settled for trial:-
4. Whether the plaintiffs are entitled for the reliefs against the defendants as prayed for ?
85
5. To What relief ?
6. Plaintiff called absent. No representation in spite of conditional Order. For default, suit is dismissed.
Pronounced by me in the open Court, this the 17thday of August,
2015.
II Additional
District Judge,
Madanapalle. Appendix of Evidence
Nil - -
II A. D. J,
Madanapalle.
Draft/Fair Judgment in
O.S. No. 45 / 2014
Dated 17.08.2015
86 87
IN THE COURT OF THE II ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE, MADANAPALLE
Present : Dr. S.S.S.Jaya Raju., II Additional District Judge, Madanapalle.
Wednesday, the second (02nd ) day of September, Two thousand and fifteen.
ORIGINAL SUIT No. 23 / 2013 Between:
1. Pasala Venkata Subba Reddy,
2. Vonkireddy Madhava Reddy, … Plaintiffs
And:
19.Putta Krishnamma,
20.Putta Rama Subramanyam Reddy,
21.Putta Bayya Reddy,
22.Putta Yadmuni Raja Reddy,
23.P Vimala Kumari,
24.Putta Siva Subramnayam Reddy,
25.Putta Manikanti Reddy,
26.Vijaya Gouri,
27.Indrani,
28.Putta Madana Mohan Reddy,
29.Putta Deepthi,
30.Putta Nikhil Reddy,
31.Putta Harvarsha Vardhana Reddy,
32.Kondreddy Surya Narayana Reddy,
33.Putta Chandra Sekhar Reddy alias Chaitanya,
34.Putta Raja Subramanyam Reddy, … Defendants This suit coming on this day for final disposal before me in the presence of Sri Sarasa Vidya Sagar, Advocate for Plaintiffs, and of
Sri A. Phani, Advocate for Defendant No.14, D2 to D5, and D7 having remained ex-parte, plaintiff called absent no representation in spite of conditional Order, this court delivered the following:-
J U D G M E N T
12.Suit to declare the Registered General Power of Attorney,
dated 15.02.2013 executed by the defendants 1 to 6 in favour
of the 7th defendant in respect of the plaint schedule properties as null, void, inoperative in the eye of law and for costs of the suit.
88
13.The following issues are settled for trial:-
7. Whether the plaintiffs are entitled for the reliefs against the defendants as prayed for ?
8. To What relief ?
9. Plaintiff called absent. No representation in spite of conditional Order. For default, suit is dismissed.
Pronounced by me in the open Court, this the 17thday of August,
2015.
II Additional
District Judge,
Madanapalle. Appendix of Evidence
Nil - -
II A. D. J,
Madanapalle.
Draft/Fair Judgment in
O.S. No. 45 / 2014
Dated 17.08.2015
89
IN THE COURT OF THE VII ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE,
MADANAPALLE
Present :: K.V. Mahalakshmi,
II Additional District Judge,
FAC VII Additional District Judge,
Madanapalle.
Thursday, the tenth (10 th ) day of August, 2017.
ORIGINAL S UIT No.14 of 2009
Between: Moray Shiva Kumar, s/o Late Moray Venkoba Rao, Hindu aged about 49 years, Trader, now residing at H.no.428 K3,
Devamba Agrahara, K.R. Mohalla, Mysore City, Karnataka
State through the City Civil Court, Mysore, but native of
Madanapalle town.
… Plaintiff
And
1. M.V. Lalitha Bai (since died) w/o Late Moray Venkoba Rao,
House wife, Hindu, aged about 70 years,
2. M Ramesh @ Ashok, Hindu, aged about 46 years, Trader,
Defendants 1 and 2 are residing at H.No.15/313A, Gopal
Reddy Street, Madanapalle Town, Chittoor District.
3. K Sandhya Rani, Hindu, aged about 50 years, D/o Late
Moray Venkoba Rao and w/o Sri S Keshavanatha Rao,
Trader, residing at H.No.2362, Malliage Raste, Kuvempu
Nagar within the local limits of Mysore City, Karnataka State through City Civil Court, Mysore City.
4. L.G. Shoba Rani, Hindu, aged about 44 years, D/o Late
Moray Venkoba Rao and w/o L.G. Rahu, Trader, now residing at Kushi G2 1st flat, Temple Street, Raja Rajeswari
Nagar, Banagalore City, Karnataka State (within the local limits of City Civil Court, Bangalore City, Karnataka).
5. Purohith Chogalall s/o Late P Sanoji, Hindu, aged about 43 years, H.No.14299 of East Kothapeta, Madanapalle town,
Chittoor District.
90
6. Appinapalli Bhaskarachari s/o A Eswarachari, Hindu, aged about 41 years, Hindu, now residing at D.No.II277, Co operative society Colony, B.K.Palli of Madanapalle town,
Chittoor District. (Plaintiff and defendants 2 to 4 are recognized as the L.Rs of deceased defendant no.1 as per the orders in I.A.517/2009,
dated 22.04.2010.
… Defendants
This suit coming on this day for final disposal before me in the presence of Sri Sarasa Subramanyam, Advocate for Plaintiff,
Sri N.S.N. Prasad, Advocate for Defendants No.2, 3 and 4, and Sri
S. Rajendra, Advocate for Defendant No.5 and 6 and Defendant
No.1 died and a memo is filed on behalf of the plaintiff stating that due to the intervention of th elders and well wishers the subject matter of the dispute was amicably settled between both parties in accordance with the reasons mentioned in the memo and as such the plaintiff is not pressing the suit and the suit may be dismissed without costs. In the light of the said memo this suit is hereby dismissed as adjusted out of court and not pressed, the court delivered the following:
J U D G M E N T
1.Suit for declare half share of plaintiff in items 1 and 2 and and to effect partition and separate possession of the same, alternatively to set aside or cancel registered partition deed dated 07.07.2001, to direct partition and separate possession of suit items into two and to allot one share, to direct the 2nd defendant to render true and correct past share in profits from April, 2006 to April, 2009 and from the date of suit till separate possession, restraining the defendants 1, 2 and 5 from changing, altering or 91 creating till the final decree proceedings and to pass preliminary decree and for costs of the suit.
2. The following issues are settled for trial:
1. Whether the Plaintiff is entitled for partition and separate possession of his half share in items 1 and 2 of the Plaint schedule properties?
2. Whether the plaintiff is entitled for alternative relief to set aside or cancel the registered partition deed
dated 07.07.2001 as null and void on the ground that
the same is vitiated by fraud, misrepresentation and unequal?
3. Whether the plaintiff is entitled for partition and separate possession of his half share in the entire plaint schedule properties ?
4. Whether the second defendant is liable to render true and correct past share in profits in respect of the plaint schedule properties to the plaintiff for a period from April, 2006 to April, 2009 ?
5. Whether the second defendant is liable to render true, proper and correct share in profits in respect of the plaint schedule properties to the plaintiff or by such other defendants from the date of suit till the date of delivery of his separate possession through process of law ?
6. Whether the plaintiff is entitled for permanent injunction, restraining the defendants 1, 2 and 5 from changing, altering or creating in any way or manner or manner the item number 1 of the plaint schedule properties either by them or their followers or men or representatives in title till the final decree proceedings are worked out ?
92
7. To What relief ?
3.A memo is filed on behalf of the plaintiff stating that due to the intervention of th elders and well wishers the subject matter of the dispute was amicably settled between both parties in accordance with the reasons mentioned in the memo and as such the plaintiff is not pressing the suit and the suit may be dismissed without costs. In the light of the said memo this suit is hereby dismissed as adjusted out of court and not pressed; and
4.There shall be no order as to costs.
Pronounced by me in the open Court, this the 10th day of
August, 2017.
II ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE,
FAC VII ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE,
MADANAPALLE.
Appendix of Evidence
Nil -
II ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE,
FAC VII ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE,
MADANAPALLE.
Draft/Fair Judgment in
O.S. No. 14 / 2009
Dated 10.08.2017
93
A Memo is filed on behalf of the DHR stating that the
Hon’ble Supreme Court in
Civil Appeal
No.29624/2016 had set aside the decree in
O.S.No.7/2013 on
10.10.2013 as such this petition has became infructuous. Memo is recorded and this E.P. is hereby dismissed as infructuous,