Smt Kotla Lavanya Bal Reddy

Judge, Family Court cum IV Additional District and Sessions Judge, Sangareddy

Sangareddy, PDJ Court Complex · Sangareddy · Telangana

Smt Kotla Lavanya Bal Reddy, Judge, Family Court cum IV Additional District and Sessions Judge, Sangareddy, is posted at Sangareddy, PDJ Court Complex, Sangareddy, Telangana, India. 1,012 court orders on record since 2023. 9 judgments with full text available. Primarily handles EP, CRLMP, OS cases.

1,012

Total Orders

Judgments

Orders/Month

Postings

Featured Judgments

F.C.O.P/5/2023

Momul Srikanth vs Deepika

03 Nov 2023

1 of 7 OP FCNo.5 of 2023

IN THE COURT OF JUDGE, FAMILY COURT :: SANGAREDDY

Present: Smt Kotla Lavanya Bal Reddy

Judge, Family Court

Sangareddy.

FRIDAY, DATED THIS THE 03rd DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2023

F.C.O.P. No.5 of 2023

Between:

Momul Srikanth S/o M. Chanbasappa Aged 35 years, Occupation: Un-employee R/o.H.No.4-8-82/4/4, Manjeera Nagar Sangareddy Town and District.

...Petitioner

AND

Deepika W/o M. Srikanth D/o Mahadev Aged 25 years, Occupation: Engineer R/o.H.No.32-949/10A, Station Road Opposite Railway station, Ambika Nagar Kalburgi, Gulbarga Town & district, Karnataka- 585 102.

...Respondent

This petition came for hearing before me on 31-10-2023 in the presence of Sri N. Veeranna Patil, Advocate for Petitioner, while Respondent is set exparte, upon perusing the material papers on record and upon hearing both sides, having stood over for consideration till this day, this Court made the following:-

ORDER

1. The petitioner being the husband of the respondent/ wife filed this petition under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 to

SCJ 2 of 7 OP FCNo.5 of 2023 grant decree of restitution of conjugal rights against the respondent.

2. The brief facts of the petition are that the marriage between the petitioner and respondent is solemnized on 02-08-2020 at

Haralaya Bhavan, Mankar Layout, near Ram mandir, Jewargi

Road, Kalburgi, Gulbraga Town and District according to Hindu rites and customs and was arranged marriage and that the petitioner and respondent lived together happily together only for two months and thereafter for petty matters respondent disturbed the petitioner. That the child of petitioner and respondent born on 25-02-2022 by name Shalini and is aged about 11 months. That thereafter respondent started misbehaving with the petitioner and abused the petitioner.

3. It is further averred by petitioner that the respondent with wicked intention to abandon the matrimonial house started ill treating the petitioner and that on 09-12-2022 the respondent has without reasonable excuse withdrawn from the society of respondent and went to her parent’s house and that petitioner tried contacting the respondent on phone for several times asking to resume cohabitation, the respondent declined to do

SCJ 3 of 7 OP FCNo.5 of 2023 so and that the respondent is presently living with her parents along with her child.

4. It is further averred that the petitioner issued legal notice to respondent on 13-02-2023 demanding the respondent to join him to lead marital life and that the respondent issued reply notice to petitioner on 20-02-2023 denying the allegations and that there is no resumption of cohabitation till date as such the petitioner was constrained to file the present petition for restitution of conjugal rights.

5. Despite service of notice, respondent remained exparte.

6. In order to prove the case of the petitioner, he himself examined as P.W.1 and got marked Exs.P1 to P5.

7. Heard arguments of petitioner and perused the record.

8. Now, the point for consideration is: Whether the petitioner is entitled for decree of restitution of conjugal rights against the respondent as prayed for?

9. POINT:-The petitioner himself examined as Pw1 and he categorically deposed about his marriage with the respondent and about the birth of girl child and about respondent withdrawing from society without reasonable excuse on 09-12-

SCJ 4 of 7 OP FCNo.5 of 2023 2022 petitioner also deposed about issuing legal notice and receiving reply notice from the respondent. In support of his oral evidence, Pw1 relied on Ex.P1 to P5. ExP1 and P2 are the original wedding card and wedding photograph which discloses the marriage between petitioner and respondent. Ex.P3 is the office copy of legal notice, which shows that petitioner issued legal notice to respondent demanding her to join conjugal life with the petitioner. Ex.P4 is the original acknowledgment card which shows that the legal notice is received by the respondent.

Ex.P5 is the original reply notice issued by the respondent.

10.It is well settled that the burden of proving reasonable excuse lies on the person who withdrawn from the society of spouse.

Hence in present case, the burden of proving reasonable excuse lies on the respondent, who withdrawn from the society of the petitioner. The perusal of Ex.P5 shows that the respondent admitted the marriage with the petitioner and birth of girl child out of their wed lock. The respondent alleged in reply notice under Ex.P5 stating that the petitioner and his family members harassed her physically and mentally demanding additional dowry and that petitioner only sent her

SCJ 5 of 7 OP FCNo.5 of 2023 out of his house to bring more dowry, except these allegations against the petitioner, the respondent has not filed any evidence to prove her allegations in reply notice and the respondent in spite of service of notice from the court, she did not entered appearance and remained exparte, hence the allegations levelled in her reply notice cannot be said to be proved without any evidence except bare allegations.

11.Further the respondent also admitted in her reply notice under

Ex.P5 that she is staying with her parents along with her girl child and she further stated in Ex.P5 that she is ever ready to join the petitioner to lead happy marital life with him and that the she loves the petitioner so much. Hence it is clear that the respondent has withdrawn from the society of petitioner and the respondent has failed to prove the allegations levelled against the petitioner and failed to prove the reasonable excuse by adducing evidence, but however she also shown interest to lead marital life with petitioner by issuing reply notice to petitioner, hence there is no other legal ground why the relief should not be granted and this court is satisfied with the truth of the averments made in the petition, hence this court is inclined

SCJ 6 of 7 OP FCNo.5 of 2023 to grant relief of restitution of conjugal rights as prayed for by the petitioner. Accordingly this point is answered in favor of the petitioner.

12. IN THE RESULT this petition is allowed by granting decree of restitution of conjugal rights, directing the respondent to join the company of petitioner along with her girl child to lead happy marital life with the petitioner, within one month from the date of receipt of copy of this order. In the circumstances of the case petitioner is directed to bear his own costs.

Typed to my dictation, corrected and pronounced by me in the open court on this 03 rd day of November, 2023.

Judge, Family Court

Sangareddy

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

Witnesses examined on behalf of Petitioner Respondent

PW1 M. Srikanth - NIL -

Exhibits marked for Petitioner

Ex.P1 Original Wedding card.

Ex.P2 Original Marriage photographs.

Ex.P3 Office copy of legal notice dated 13-02-2023.

SCJ 7 of 7 OP FCNo.5 of 2023

Ex.P4 Original acknowledgment card dated 15-02-2023.

Ex.P5 Original reply notice.

Ex.P6 Photostat copy of Aadhar card of petitioner.

Exhibits marked for Respondent - NIL-

Judge, Family Court

Sangareddy

SCJ

CRLMP.BAIL/1000576/2025

State of Telangana, through PS. Kondapur vs Chekurthi Lal Reddy

06 Oct 2025

1 Crl.MP No.576/2025, IV ADJ Court,SRD

IN THE COURT OF IV ADDITIONAL SESSIONS JUDGE SANGAREDDY

Present: Smt Kotla Lavanya Bal Reddy IV Additional Sessions Judge Sangareddy

MONDAY, THIS THE 6TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2025

Cr.l.M.P. No. 576of 2025 IN Cr.No. 166 of 2025 (P.S.Kondapur )

Between:

1. Chekurthi Lal Reddy, S/o. Laxma Reddy, Aged about 38 years, Occ: Agriculture, R/o. H.No.2-5, Mahammadapur village, Kondapur Mandal, Sangareddy District.

2. Chekurthi Vittal Reddy, S/o. Laxma Reddy, Aged about 35 years, Occ: Agriculture, R/o. H.No.2-5, Mahammadapur village, Kondapur Mandal, Sangareddy District.

...Petitioners/A1 and A2

AND The State of Telangana Through Station House Officer, P.S. Kondapur P.S.

...Respondent/Complainant.

PETITION FILED UNDER SECTION 483 OF BNSS

This petition came up before me for final hearing on 29.09.2025 in the presence of Sri M.Anjaiah, Counsel for petitioners/ A1 and A2and of Learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the state, having perused the material on record, having heard both sides and having stood over for consideration, the Court made the following:-

O R D E R

1.This is the first bail application filed under Section 482 Bharatiya

Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS) by Petitioners/A1 and A2 praying to grant anticipatory bail in the event of their arrest for the offence 2 Crl.MP No.576/2025, IV ADJ Court,SRD under Sections125, 324(4) of BNS r/w. Sec. 3(5) of BNS and Section 3 of Explosive Substances Act, 1908 (Amendment 2001) in Crime No.

166 of 2025 of P.S.Kondapur.

2. The brief averments of the prosecution case are that:

A1 and A2 are residents of Mahammadapur village of Kondapur

Mandal and A3 is residing at Pati, Patancheru and he hails from

Gurujala village, Shaligouraram Mandal, Nalgonda district and while so

A1 and A2 contacted A3 to blast the rocks in their construction site at

Mahammadapur village and accordingly, on 10.09.2025 in the morning hours A3 came to the construction site of A1 and A2 along with 75 detonators along with all his equipment and illegally and without any permission and prior precaution blasted the rocks in the site of A1 and A2 by using 75 detonators and due to reckless act of A1 to A3 the house of complainant/M.Rajender Reddy and other villagers developed cracks and damaged and stating the said facts complainant lodged a complaint before Kondapur Police and basing on the same police registered a case in Cr.No. 166/2025 u/Sec. 125, 324(4) of BNS r/w. Sec. 3(5) of BNS and Section 3 of Explosive Substances Act, 1908 (Amendment 2001)and took up the investigation and on 12.09.2025

A3 was arrested and remanded to judicial custody whereas A1 and A2 3 Crl.MP No.576/2025, IV ADJ Court,SRD are absconding.

3.The brief averments of petition are that: -

Petitioners/A1 and A2 are innocent and they did not commit any offence and were falsely implicated in this case and they are no way concerned with the offence and that they are farmers and having old aged parents, wife, small children who are dependents on them and their parents need regular medication for their ailments and they are apprehending arrest from the hands of police and if they are arrested police may apply third degree methods for forcible confession and that they are respectable persons in the community.

It is further stated that they are ready to furnish sufficient sureties to the satisfaction of the court and also ready to abide by any condition that may be imposed by the court and prayed to grant anticipatory bail.

4.Notice of this application served on learned Additional Public

Prosecutor who filed counter contending that there is prima-facie case against A1 and A2 and they have to be arrested and that investigation is in progress for collecting some more evidence and for examining witnesses and if the petitioners/A1 and A2 are released on bail they may commit similar offence and that they committed negligent and 4 Crl.MP No.576/2025, IV ADJ Court,SRD reckless act of blasting with explosive substances in public place without any prior permission and precaution which may endanger the human life and if the petitioners/accused enlarged on bail they may manipulate the material witnesses or may abscond thereby they may tamper the evidence and hamper investigation. Hence, prayed to dismiss the petition.

5.Heard both sides and perused the CD file and other material available on record.

6.Now the point for determination is:

“Whether the petitioners/A1 and A2 are entitled to be granted anticipatory on bail for the offence under Sections 125, 324(4) of BNS r/w. Sec. 3(5) of BNS and Section 3 of Explosive Substances Act, 1908 (Amendment 2001) as prayed for ?” 7.POINT: From the perusal of CD file, prima-facie would reveal on 10.09.2025 on the instructions of A1 and A2, A3 made blasts with 75 detonators in the construction site of A1 and A2 at Mahammadapur village of Kondapur Mandal without any prior permission and without taking precautionary measures. Further during the course of arguments, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor vehemently contended that serious allegations are leveled against A1 to A3 and that investigation is in progress and if petitioners/A1 and A2 are 5 Crl.MP No.576/2025, IV ADJ Court,SRD granted anticipatory bail they may abscond or manipulate the material witnesses and Section 3 of Explosive Substances Act, 1908 (Amendment 2001) is punishable with imprisonment for life or imprisonment for a term which shall not be less than ten years and with mandatory fine. Hence, taking into facts and circumstances of the case and in view of gravity of offence and as serious allegations are leveled against the petitioners/A1 and A2 and in view of pendency of investigation, this court feels that it is not a fit case to grant anticipatory bail to petitioners/A1and A2 at this stage, and petition is liable to be dismissed. Accordingly, this point is answered.

8.In the result, this petition is dismissed.

Typed to my dictation by Stenographer, corrected and pronounced by me in the open Court on this the 6 th day of October, 2025.

IV Additional Sessions Judge Sangareddy. Copy to:-

1. The Secretary, Legal Services Authority, Sangareddy. 2.Sri L.Devi Das Naik, Chief Legal Aid Defense Counsel

3. Sri M.Anjaiah Advocate for petitioners/A1 and A2

Note:- For Free Legal Aid and Assistance Call: 15100.

6 Crl.MP No.576/2025, IV ADJ Court,SRD

CRLMP.BAIL/1000569/2025

State of Telangana, through PS. Kondapur vs Rupani Vamshi

06 Oct 2025

1 Crl.MP No.569/2025, IV ADJ Court,SRD

IN THE COURT OF IV ADDITIONAL SESSIONS JUDGE SANGAREDDY

Present: Smt Kotla Lavanya Bal Reddy IV Additional Sessions Judge Sangareddy

MONDAY, THIS THE 6TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2025

Cr.l.M.P. No. 569of 2025 IN Cr.No. 166 of 2025 (P.S.Kondapur )

Between: Rupani Vamshi, S/o.Ramesh, Aged about 25 years, Occ: Labour, R/o. Pati, Patancheru, Sangareddy and native of Gurajala village, Shali Gouraram Mandal, Nalgonda district.

...Petitioner/A3

AND The State of Telangana Through Station House Officer, P.S. Kondapur P.S.

...Respondent/Complainant.

PETITION FILED UNDER SECTION 483 OF BNSS

This petition came up before me for final hearing on 29.09.2025 in the presence of M/s. G.Surender, Counsel for petitioner/ A3 and of Learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the state, having perused the material on record, having heard both sides and having stood over for consideration, the Court made the following:-

O R D E R

1.This is the first bail application filed under Section 483 Bharatiya

Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita(BNSS) by petitioner/A3 praying to enlarge him on bail for the offence under Sections125, 324(4) of BNS r/w. Sec.

3(5) of BNS and Section 3 of Explosive Substances Act, 1908 (Amendment 2001) in Crime No. 166 of 2025 of P.S.Kondapur.

2 Crl.MP No.569/2025, IV ADJ Court,SRD

2. The brief averments of the prosecution case are that:

A1 and A2 are residents of Mahammadapur village of Kondapur

Mandal and A3 is residing at Pati, Patancheru and he hails from

Gurujala village, Shaligouraram Mandal, Nalgonda district and while so

A1 and A2 contacted A3 to blast the rocks in their construction site at

A3 was arrested and remanded to judicial custody whereas A1 and A2 are absconding.

3 Crl.MP No.569/2025, IV ADJ Court,SRD

3.The brief averments of petition are that: -

Petitioner/A3 is innocent and he did not commit any offence and he was falsely implicated in this case and he is no way concerned with the offence and that he is not owner of the land and he worked as per the instructions of A1 and A2 and no recovery was made from this petitioner and no overt acts were attributed against this petitioner and that he has no previous criminal back ground and further the entire investigation is completed except filing of charge sheet and it is further stated that he is ready to furnish sufficient sureties to the satisfaction of the court and also ready to abide by any condition that may be imposed by the court and prayed to enlarge him on bail.

4.Notice of this application served on learned Additional Public

Prosecutor who filed counter contending that there is prima-facie case against A3 and A1 and A2 are absconding and that investigation is in progress for collecting some more evidence and for examining witnesses and if the petitioner/A3 is released on bail the accused may commit similar offence and he committed negligent and reckless act blasting with explosive substances in public place without any prior permission and precaution which may endanger the human life and if the petitioner/accused enlarged on bail he may manipulate the 4 Crl.MP No.569/2025, IV ADJ Court,SRD material witnesses or he may abscond thereby he may tamper the evidence and hamper investigation. Hence, prayed to dismiss the petition.

5.Heard both sides and perused the CD file and other material available on record.

6.Now the point for determination is:

“Whether the petitioner/A3 is entitled to be released on bail for the offence under Sections 125, 324(4) of BNS r/w. Sec. 3(5) of BNS and Section 3 of Explosive Substances Act, 1908 (Amendment 2001) as prayed for ?” 7.POINT: From the perusal of CD file prima-facie it would reveal that on 10.09.2025 on the instructions of A1 and A2, A3 made blasts with 75 detonators in the construction site of A1 and A2 at Mahammadapur village of Kondapur Mandal without any prior permission and without taking precautionary measures. Further during the course of arguments, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor vehemently contended that serious allegations are leveled against A1 to A3 and that investigation is in progress and if petitioner/A3 enlarged on bail he may abscond or manipulate the material witnesses and Section 3 of Explosive Substances Act, 1908 (Amendment 2001) is punishable with imprisonment for life or imprisonment for a term which shall not be less than ten years, with mandatory fine. Hence, taking into facts 5 Crl.MP No.569/2025, IV ADJ Court,SRD and circumstances of the case and in view of gravity of offence and as serious allegations are leveled against the petitioner/A3 and in view of pendency of investigation, this court feels that it is not a fit case to grant bail to petitioner/A3 at this stage, and petition is liable to be dismissed. Accordingly, this point is answered.

8.In the result, this petition is dismissed.

Typed to my dictation by Stenographer, corrected and pronounced by me in the open Court on this the 6 th day of October, 2025.

IV Additional Sessions Judge Sangareddy. Copy to:-

1. The Secretary, Legal Services Authority, Sangareddy. 2.Sri L.Devi Das Naik, Chief Legal Aid Defense Counsel

3. M/s. G.Surender, Advocate for petitioner/A3

Note:- For Free Legal Aid and Assistance Call: 15100.

CRLMP.BAIL/1000575/2025

State of Telangana, through PS. Zaheerabad Town vs Kotha Golla Harshavardhan

06 Oct 2025

1 Crl.MP No.575/2025, IV ADJ Court,SRD

IN THE COURT OF IV ADDITIONAL SESSIONS JUDGE SANGAREDDY

Present: Smt Kotla Lavanya Bal Reddy IV Additional Sessions Judge Sangareddy

MONDAY, THIS THE 6TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2025

Cr.l.M.P. No. 575 of 2025 IN Cr.No. 229 of 2025 (P.S. Zaheerabad Town)

Between: Kotha Golla Harshavardhan, S/o. Shiva Kumar, Age: 19 years, Occ: Student, R/o. H.No.5-89, Gurjuwada village of Kohir Mandal Now at Mahindra Colony, Zaheerabad Town, Sangareddy District.

...Petitioner/Accused

AND The State of Telangana Through Station House Officer, P.S. Zaheerabad Town

...Respondent/Complainant.

PETITION FILED UNDER SECTION 483 OF BNSS

This petition came up before me for final hearing on 29.09.2025 in the presence of T.Anusha and B.Venkata Ramulu, Counsel for Petitionesr/Accused and of Learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the state, having perused the material on record, having heard both sides and having stood over for consideration, the Court made the following:-

O R D E R

1. This is the fourth bail application filed under Section 483

Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita(BNSS) by petitioner/Accused praying to enlarge him on bail for the offence under Section 109 of

BNS in Crime No. 229 of 2025 of P.S. Zaheerabad Town.

2 Crl.MP No.575/2025, IV ADJ Court,SRD

2. The brief averments of the petition are that:

The third bail application filed by petitioner was dismissed vide

Crl.M.P.No.548 of 2025, dt.09.09.2025 on the ground that there are no

changed circumstances and facts. The petitioner further stated that

Petitioner/accused is innocent and he did not commit any offence and he was falsely implicated in this case and he is no way concerned with the offence and that recently he is ITI Student and there is apprehension of losing academic year and due to his sudden arrest his family members are facing mental pressure and agony. Further it is stated that entire investigation is completed except filing charge sheet and that he is ready to furnish sufficient sureties to the satisfaction of the court and also ready to face trial and to abide by any condition that may be imposed by the court and prayed to enlarge him on bail.

3.Notice of this application served on learned Additional Public

Prosecutor who filed counter contending that there is prima-facie material on record to believe that petitioner/Accused committed the offence and if the petitioner/Accused is enlarged on bail, he may commit similar offence by attacking the injured and he may influence 3 Crl.MP No.575/2025, IV ADJ Court,SRD the material witnesses or abscond and thereby he may tamper the evidence and hamper investigation. Hence, prayed to dismiss the petition.

4.Heard both sides and perused the CD file and other material available on record.

5.Now the point for determination is:

“Whether the petitioner/Accused is entitled to be released on bail for the offence under Sections 109 BNS as prayed for ?” 6. POINT: The third bail application filed by petitioner was dismissed vide Crl.M.P.No. 548 of 2025, dt. 09.09.2025 on the ground that investigation is pending and that there are no changed circumstances and facts. Though in counter the learned Additional public prosecutor stated that investigation is not yet completed, during the course of arguments he fairly conceded that major part of the investigation is completed except filing of charge sheet. Further

Case diary also reveals that scene of offence cum seizure panchanama and confession panchanama of Accused was also completed and

Accused is in judicial custody since 17.07.2025 and Medical Certificate of injured was also received. In the said circumstances, this court is of the view that no purpose would be served if petitioner/accused is kept 4 Crl.MP No.575/2025, IV ADJ Court,SRD in judicial remand and he is no more required for further investigation, hence as there are changed circumstances and facts, the petitioner/accused is entitled to be enlarged on bail. Hence, this petition is deserves to be allowed on certain conditions.

7.In the result, the petition is allowed, on following conditions:-

a) That the Petitioner /accused shall execute personal bond for a sum of Rs.20,000/- with two sureties for like sum each to the satisfaction of the Learned Addl. Judicial Magistrate of First Class,

Zaheerabad.

b) The Petitioner/accused shall not commit further offence and shall not threaten or induce the defacto complainant or witnesses and they shall co-operate for pending investigation if any.

c)The Petitioner/accused shall appear before concerned

Station House Officer on every Sunday between 10 am to 5 pm for a period of one month or till filing of charge sheet whichever is earlier.

Typed to my dictation by Stenographer, corrected and pronounced by me in the open Court on this the 6 th day of October, 2025.

IV Additional Sessions Judge Sangareddy.

5 Crl.MP No.575/2025, IV ADJ Court,SRD

Copy to:-

1. The Secretary, Legal Services Authority, Sangareddy.

2. The Addl. JMFC, Zaheerabad

3. T. Anusha and B.Venkatramulu, Advocates for petitioner/accused

4. The SHO, P.S.Zaheerabad Town

5. The Superintendent, Central Prison Kandi, Sangareddy District. Note:- For Free Legal Aid and Assistance Call: 15100.

MVOP/310/2017

Koule Sujatha vs Talari Mallikarjuna

14 Aug 2024

IN THE COURT OF IV ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE:

SANGAREDDY

PRESENT:SMT. KOTLA LAVANYA BAL REDDY, IV Additional District Judge, Sangareddy.

Wednesday, the 14th day of August, 2024

MVOP.No. 310 of 2017

Between:-

Koule Sujatha W/o Koule, Aged about: 32 years, Occ: Labour, R/o H.No.13-58, SN Colony, Near Indugula Pochamma Temple, At Ramchandrapuram, Sangareddy District....Claimant.

A N D

1. Talari Mallikarjun S/o Veeraiah, Aged about: 22 years, Occ: Driver, R/o H.No.7-7-1, Janwada (V), Shankarpally (M), R.R. District.

2. Bandaru Shankar Goud S/o Narsimlu Goud, Aged: Major, Occ: Business, Owner of Car bearing No. TS_06-UA-3330, R/o H.No.9-4-105/4A, Raghavendra Colony, Gadwal Town, Mahaboobnagar District.

3. Shri Ram General Insurance Co. Ltd., Through its Divisional Manager, 4th Floor, Sai Datta Arcade, Road No.6, Himayathnagar, Hyderabad. Policy No.10003/31/17/483401, Valid From 08-01-2017 to 07-01-2018. … Respondents.

Clam:- Claim Petition filed Claiming Compensation Under Section 166 of M.V. Act, 1988.

This case is came up before me on this day in the presence of Sri. Ch.Baswaraj, Advocate, Counsel for Claimant and of Sri. M.Anil Kumar, Advocate, Counsel for Respondent No.3 and of Respondent Nos.1 and 2 are set exparte; and having stood over for consideration till this date, this Court delivered the following:- -2-

ORDER, DATED 14-08-2024

Claimant and Respondent No.3 are present. Learned Counsels on both sides are present. Due to the advice by the members of the Lok

Adalat bench and the learned counsel on either side, both the parties have arrived at an amicable settlement and entered into compromise.

As per the terms of compromise, between the parties, Respondent No.3 has offered to pay an amount of Rs.40,000/- (Rupees Forty Thousand only) and to be deposited within one month from the date of award and in default to deposit along with interest @ 6% p.a. and the claimant is agreed to receive the same towards full and final settlement of her claim. The Claimant is permitted to with draw their entire share amount.

Both the parties have reported that the said compromise is voluntary and without any force. Satisfied that the compromise between the parties is voluntary. Hence award is passed accordingly in terms of compromise (vide separate one).

Pronounced by me in the open court on this the 14 th day of

August, 2024.

IV Additional District Judge, Sangareddy.

Order Record 984 total

Case No.	Parties	Date	Type	Outcome
EP/65/2024	Sri Mohanlal Choudhary vs M.A.Jaleel	06 Oct 2025	closed	—
CRLMP.BAIL/1000569/2025	State of Telangana, through PS. Kondapur vs Rupani Vamshi	06 Oct 2025	Dismissed	—
CRLMP.BAIL/1000575/2025	State of Telangana, through PS. Zaheerabad Town vs Kotha Golla Harshavardhan	06 Oct 2025	Petition is allowed.	—
CRLMP.BAIL/1000576/2025	State of Telangana, through PS. Kondapur vs Chekurthi Lal Reddy	06 Oct 2025	Dismissed	—
F.C.O.P/22/2025	G Likhitha vs T Venkateswarlu	06 Oct 2025	Petition is allowed.	—
SC/10/2025	State of Telangana, through P.S. Narayankhed vs Bantu Srinu	29 Sep 2025	Acquitted	—
CRLMP.BAIL/1000559/2025	State of Telangana, through PS. Zaheerabad Town. vs Hasan Beg Naseema Bee	29 Sep 2025	Petition is allowed.	—
CRLMP.BAIL/1010579/2025	State of Telangana, through PS. Zaheerabad Town vs Shadhalla Venkatesham/Budda	29 Sep 2025	Dismissed	—
OS/178/2013	Yamuna Muthyala vs Ms Deccant Township Pvt Ltd.,	26 Sep 2025	Dismissed with costs	—
A.R.B.O.P/6/2019	Cable Corporation of India Limited. vs Kirby Building Systems and Structures India Pvt. Ltd.,	24 Sep 2025	Dismissed	—
CRLMP.BAIL/10553/2025	State of Telangana, through P.S. Hathnoora vs Dappu Sagar	23 Sep 2025	Petition is allowed.	—
F.C.O.P/26/2025	Avusaala Gayathri vs Sonti Santhosh Kumar GPA holder Natural Father Ashok Kumar	17 Sep 2025	Petition is allowed.	—
EP/7/2024	M/s Shriram Fiance Ltd. vs Kanthi Arpana and Another	16 Sep 2025	Dismissed	—
CRLA/19/2024	Madduri Veeraiah @ Veeranna vs The State though PS Sadasivapet	16 Sep 2025	abated	—
EP/76/2022	M/s Shriram Transport Finance Co.Ltd. vs N.Rajaiah	15 Sep 2025	Dismissed	—
EP/302/2022	Margadarsi Chit Fund Pvt Ltd., vs JDR1 B.Sridevi	15 Sep 2025	closed	—
CRLMP.BAIL/110542/2025	State of Telangana, through PS.Hathnoora vs Putta Anil Kumar	15 Sep 2025	Dismissed	—
CRLMP.BAIL/1010535/2025	State of Telangana, through PS. Raikode vs Dudekula Ismail/Ismail	15 Sep 2025	Dismissed	—
CRLMP.BAIL/1110554/2025	State of Telangana, through PS. Gummadidala vs Mohammed Akbar Hussain	15 Sep 2025	Dismissed	—
MVOP/50/2023	Katroth Raju vs R1 N.Raju	13 Sep 2025	settle before lokadalat	—
MVOP/70/2022	K.Raj Kumar vs Uggina Satish S/o Narayan Rao, aged about 36 years Occ Lorry driver	13 Sep 2025	settle before lokadalat	—
MVOP/73/2025	Boyini Vijay vs Korra Sakru	13 Sep 2025	settle before lokadalat	—
MVOP/111/2025	Kummari Padma vs Vs1.Sayan Das	13 Sep 2025	settle before lokadalat	—
MVOP/126/2023	Arrolla Yadaiah vs R1 Smt.Balamolla Sindhuja and (02) Others	13 Sep 2025	settle before lokadalat	—
MVOP/198/2024	Boini Peddulu vs R1 Siraboina Jeevana Jyothi	13 Sep 2025	settle before lokadalat	—
F.C.O.P/8/2025	Sadhana Manepally vs C.Nagaraqju	13 Sep 2025	Decreed	—
F.C.O.P/26/2023	Kummari Kranthi Kumar vs K. Sandhya Rani	13 Sep 2025	Decreed	—
EP/293/2022	M/s Shriram City Union Finance vs JDR1 Md. Asad	12 Sep 2025	Dismissed	—
CRLMP.BAIL/1000543/2025	State of Telangana, through PS. Zaheerabad Town vs Syed Tabresh	12 Sep 2025	Petition is allowed.	—
EP/122/2019	Manappuram Finance Ltd., vs Nagesh	11 Sep 2025	Dismissed	—
CRLMP.BAIL/1000536/2025	State of Telangana, P.S. Zaheerabad Town vs Shadhalla Venkatesham/ Budda	11 Sep 2025	Dismissed	—
EP/100006/2018	M/s Shriram City Union Finance Ltd. vs B.Srisailam	10 Sep 2025	Dismissed	—
OS/66/2016	Mohammed Burhanudin vs MOhd Rafeeq	10 Sep 2025	Partly Decreed	—
OS/48/2019	Syed Azar Ali vs Syed Riyaz Ahmed	09 Sep 2025	Dismissed for Default	—
OS/231/2022	Ravindher Vyasabattu vs B.Mohan Reddy	09 Sep 2025	closed	—
CRLMP.BAIL/1000529/2025	State of Telangana, through PS. Zaheerabad Town vs Mohammed Gouse	09 Sep 2025	Dismissed	—
CRLMP.BAIL/1010548/2025	State of Telangana, through P.S.Zaheerabad Town vs Kotha Golla Harshavardhan	09 Sep 2025	Dismissed	—
EP/184/2020	Shriram City Union finance Ltd., vs G.Ashok	08 Sep 2025	Dismissed	—
EP/244/2020	Shriram City Union Finance vs B.Karun Raj and (2) Others	08 Sep 2025	Dismissed	—
OS/17/2012	Mir Raziuddin Ali Maqsood vs Shekha Goel	08 Sep 2025	Partly Decreed	—
OS/181/2016	Mangalampalli Atchyuta Reddy Serya Ramanadham vs Suvarna Infra	08 Sep 2025	closed	—
G.W.O.P/25/2024	Suvarna Sripad vs Divya Jyothi Gurappa	08 Sep 2025	Transfer	—
EP/29/2019	Shriram Transport Finance Co. Ltd. vs N RAGHAVULU	03 Sep 2025	Dismissed	—
CRLMP.BAIL/1000509/2025	State of Telangana, through PS. Chiragpally vs Rathod Santosh	03 Sep 2025	Dismissed	—
EP/44/2024	M/s Shriram Finance Ltd., vs B.Laleethamma And Another	01 Sep 2025	Dismissed	—
EP/138/2021	M/s Shiram City Union Finance vs JDR1 K.Jangaiah	01 Sep 2025	Dismissed	—
A.R.B.O.P/7/2022	Medari Balu vs M/s Cholamandalam investmet and Finance Ltd., and Another	01 Sep 2025	withdrawn	—
OS/17/2016	Smt.Sayamma vs Ragam Krishna	29 Aug 2025	Dismissed with costs	—
OS/131/2024	M/s. Vedan Infra and Projects Pvt Ltd., Rep. by Boinpally Mallikarjun Rao, S/o. Late B. Kondal Rao vs D1 M/s. Limra Engineering Industries, rep. by its Managing Partner and others	29 Aug 2025	closed	—
EP/78/2023	M/s John Deere Financial India Pvt Ltd., vs JDR1 Ravi Devasoth	26 Aug 2025	Dismissed	—
G.W.O.P/8/2025	Sri. Kayala Naga Satya Durga Prasad In the matter of minor Kayala Saanvi Krithi vs Smt. Tula Shyamala Devi	26 Aug 2025	withdrawn	—
EP/377/2022	M/s Shiram City Union Finance Co.Ltd., vs Karne Gangadhar	25 Aug 2025	Dismissed	—
OS/53/2022	Garela Venkatesh vs D1. Garela Gandaiah	25 Aug 2025	Dismissed	—
SC/193/2017	P.S.Chirgpally vs Vasalavath Ravi Naik	25 Aug 2025	Acquitted	—
CRLMP.BAIL/1000515/2025	State of Telangana, through PS. Zaheerabad Town vs Mohammed Akbar Hussain	25 Aug 2025	Dismissed	—
AS/6/2022	Laxman vs A.Swapna and (09) Others	22 Aug 2025	Appeal Allowed	—
EP/142/2023	M/s Shriram Finance Ltd. vs JDR1 B.Ravi Kumar	22 Aug 2025	Petition is dismissed	—
CRLMP.BAIL/1101508/2025	State of Telangana, PS. BDL Bhanoor vs Raushan Kumar	22 Aug 2025	Petition is allowed.	—
EP/46/2022	Manappuram Fianance Ltd., vs Srinivas Gouda Nalla	21 Aug 2025	Dismissed	—
EP/249/2022	M/s Shriram Traport Finance Co.Ltd., vs S.Srinvias S/o Narsimulu	21 Aug 2025	Dismissed	—
CRLMP.BAIL/10523/2025	State of Telangana, through PS.Zaheerabad Town vs Kotthagolla Harshavardhan	21 Aug 2025	Dismissed	—
CRLMP.BAIL/110507/2025	State of Telangana, through P.S. Hathnoora vs Putta Anil Kumar	21 Aug 2025	Dismissed	—
CRLMP.BAIL/1000501/2025	State of Telangana, through PS. Hathnoora vs Dappu Sagar	21 Aug 2025	Dismissed	—
EP/229/2021	M/s Shriram city Union Fina. LTd., vs JDR1 Mohd. Ali	20 Aug 2025	Dismissed	—
MVOP/243/2018	Abbas Ali Mohammad vs Salandra Kumar Pandya	19 Aug 2025	Petition is partly allowed	—
CRLMP.BAIL/1000486/2025	State of Telangana through P.S. IDA Bollaram vs Allam Sambasivudu/Samba	19 Aug 2025	Petition is allowed.	—
EP/143/2023	M/s Shriram Finance Ltd. vs JDR1 Rathod Vinod Kumar	18 Aug 2025	Petition is allowed.	—
EP/143/2023	M/s Shriram Finance Ltd. vs JDR1 Rathod Vinod Kumar	18 Aug 2025	Dismissed	—
EP/198/2013	Ms Patatcheru Steels Private limited. IDA Patanch vs Ms Pratap Steels Limited. Rep.by its Director Shashi Maheshwari	18 Aug 2025	closed	—
EP/199/2013	Ms Patancheru Steels Private Limited. vs Ms Pratap Steels limited. Rep. by its Director Shashi Maheshwari	18 Aug 2025	closed	—
EP/16/2021	Shriram City Union Finance vs JDR1 P.Nageshwar	13 Aug 2025	closed	—
CRLMP.BAIL/1000475/2025	State of Telangana, through PS. Raikode vs Dudekula Ismail/Ismail	13 Aug 2025	Dismissed	—
EP/97/2023	M/s Shriram Finance Limited (Formerly known as Shriram City Union Finance Ltd.) vs JDR1. .U. Srinivas	12 Aug 2025	Dismissed	—
MVOP/196/2021	Uppari Nagaiah vs Patlolla Indrasena Reddy and Another	12 Aug 2025	Dismissed	—
OS/137/2021	G.Jayalakshmi vs Smt. Kareem Unnisa Begum and (02) Others	12 Aug 2025	dismissed as not pressed	—
CRLMP.BAIL/1000494/2025	State of Telangana, through PS. BDL Bhanoor vs Mahammad Saddam/Saddam	12 Aug 2025	Petition is allowed.	—
CRLMP.BAIL/1000497/2025	State of Telangana, through PS. BDL Bhanoor vs Vuppunuthula Vineeth Kumar Goud	12 Aug 2025	Petition is allowed.	—
CRLMP.BAIL/1010493/2025	State of Telangana, through PS. BDL Bhanoor vs Mohammed Majid/ Munna	12 Aug 2025	Petition is allowed.	—
MVOP/129/2022	Rathod Sangram vs Mruthunjaya	11 Aug 2025	Petition is partly allowed	—
EP/32/2024	M/s Shriram Finance Ltd vs Jdr 1. A.Kavitha	07 Aug 2025	Dismissed	—
EP/137/2023	M/s Cholamandalam Investment and finance Co.ltd. vs JDR1 Mohammed Kamaluddin	07 Aug 2025	closed	—
EP/333/2022	M/s Shriram City Union Finance Co.Ltd., vs Mr.Santosh Chawan	06 Aug 2025	Dismissed	—
OS/8/2016	Yousufoddin vs D1 Bejugam Ashok	06 Aug 2025	Dismissed with costs	—
CRLRP/14/2023	Neelaknta vs Smt. Sujatha	06 Aug 2025	Dismissed	—
CRLMP.BAIL/1000479/2025	State of Telangana through P.S.Zaheerabad Town vs Kotha Golla Harshavardhan	06 Aug 2025	Dismissed	—
CRLMP.BAIL/1010480/2025	State of Telangana through PS.Pulkal vs Dappur Vineetha	06 Aug 2025	Petition is allowed.	—
A.R.B.O.P/18/2025	Yakkala Naga Satish vs M/s Gangothri Developers, Rep By Madhuram Reddy	06 Aug 2025	returned	—
A.R.B.O.P/47/2018	Ramakrishna Rao vs Arbitror and District Collector, at Sanagareddy District.	04 Aug 2025	order	—
EP/17/2021	Shriram City Uninon Finance vs JDR1 Ahmed Mohammed	01 Aug 2025	Dismissed	—
EP/60/2023	M/s Cholamandalam Investment and Finance Co.Ltd., vs JDR1 Jadav Nehru	01 Aug 2025	Dismissed	—
EP/105/2023	M/s Shriram Finance Ltd. (Formerly Known as Shriram City Uniod Finance Ltd) vs JDR1 Ch.Nagaraju	01 Aug 2025	Dismissed	—
EP/133/2023	Boini Ramaiah (died) LR C132 and Others vs The State of Telangana through the Spl.Deputy Collector, Singoor Project/RDO,	01 Aug 2025	closed	—
EP/215/2022	Manapuram Finance Ltd., vs JDR.1. Srikanth	01 Aug 2025	dismissed as not pressed	—
OP/42/2024	Gulli Pragna Priya vs P. Naveen	01 Aug 2025	Dismissed	—
OS/2/2019	Guttameedi Sathyamma vs D1.G Mallesham	01 Aug 2025	closed	—
CRLMP.BAIL/1010459/2025	State of Telangana through PS.Hathnoora vs Putta Anil Kumar	01 Aug 2025	Dismissed	—
EP/91/2023	M/s Muthoot Money Limited vs JDR1 Mohammad Ahmed	31 Jul 2025	closed	—
EP/211/2022	M/s HDB Financial Services Ltd., vs JDR1 Mohammed Abdul Waheed	31 Jul 2025	Dismissed	—
OS/125/2014	Muthangi Kasturi vs D1 M. Laxmamma	31 Jul 2025	dismissed as not pressed	—
EP/166/2023	M/s Cholamandalam Investement and Finance Co.Ltd. vs P.Praveen and Another	29 Jul 2025	Dismissed	—

Showing 100 of 984 orders — Log in to browse all pages.

Monthly Orders (Last 12 Months)

Oct 2025		5
Sep 2025		42
Aug 2025		51
Jul 2025		46
Jun 2025		40
May 2025		26
Apr 2025		33
Mar 2025		46
Feb 2025		43
Jan 2025		32
Dec 2024		64
Nov 2024		44

Frequently Asked Questions

How many cases has Smt Kotla Lavanya Bal Reddy handled?

Smt Kotla Lavanya Bal Reddy has handled 1012 court orders since 2023 at Sangareddy, PDJ Court Complex. The average disposal rate is 32 orders per month.

What types of cases does Smt Kotla Lavanya Bal Reddy hear?

Based on available records, Smt Kotla Lavanya Bal Reddy primarily handles Civil matters (Execution Petitions, Original Suits) and Motor Accident matters (Motor Accident Claims) and Criminal matters (CRL) at Sangareddy, PDJ Court Complex.

Where is Smt Kotla Lavanya Bal Reddy currently posted?

Smt Kotla Lavanya Bal Reddy is posted as Judge, Family Court cum IV Additional District and Sessions Judge, Sangareddy at Sangareddy, PDJ Court Complex, Sangareddy, Telangana.

Are judgments by Smt Kotla Lavanya Bal Reddy available online?

Yes. 9 judgments by Smt Kotla Lavanya Bal Reddy are available on Legistro with full text, outcome, and sections cited.

How fast does Smt Kotla Lavanya Bal Reddy dispose cases?

Smt Kotla Lavanya Bal Reddy disposes approximately 32 cases per month, based on 1012 orders handled over their tenure at Sangareddy, PDJ Court Complex.

Since when is Smt Kotla Lavanya Bal Reddy serving?

Smt Kotla Lavanya Bal Reddy has been serving at Sangareddy, PDJ Court Complex since 2023.

Case Types

EP 36%

CRLMP 20%

OS 14%

MVOP 12%

F 8%

CRL 5%

A 3%

AS 2%

Posting History

Feb 2024 — Oct 2025

Judge, Family Court cum IV Additional District and Sessions Judge, Sangareddy · 805 orders
Jun 2023 — Nov 2023

Judge, Family Court cum IV Additional District and Sessions Judge, Sangareddy · 207 orders
May 2023 — May 2023

Judge, Family Court cum IV Additional District and Sessions Judge, Sangareddy
Feb 2023 — Feb 2023

Judge, Family Court cum IV Additional District and Sessions Judge, Sangareddy

Other Judges at this Court

Smt. G.bhavani Chandra

Principal District and Sessions Judge, Sangareddy

412 orders

Smt. K. Jayanthi,

I Additional District and Sessions Judge, Sangare...

2,402 orders

Smt D.Madhavi Krishna

Special Judge for Trial of Cases under SCs and ST...

42 orders

Sri M.Satish Kumar

Judge, Family Court cum IV Additional District an...

39 orders

Smt. R. Sreelekha

Fast Track Sessions Court for expeditious disposal...

25 orders

Mrs. T Durga Rani Kalidindi

Special Judicial Magistrate of First Class(Mobile)...

710 orders

Ms. Amishi Jajiyan

Special Judicial Magistrate of I Class for trial o...

3 orders

Salma Fatima

Principal Junior Civil Judge-cum-Judicial Magistra...

19 orders

Smt Dhana lakshmi

I Additional Junior Civil Judge-cum-I Additional...

1,673 orders

DVR Tejo Karthik

Principal Senior Civil Judge -cum-Assistant Sessio...

513 orders

Deepti

Additional Senior Civil Judge-cum-Additional Assis...

294 orders

← View all judges at Sangareddy, PDJ Court Complex