Sri M Krishna Murthy

Senior Civil Judge Siddipet

Siddipet, PDJ Court Complex · Siddipet · Telangana

SRI M KRISHNA MURTHY, Senior Civil Judge Siddipet, is posted at Siddipet, PDJ Court Complex, Siddipet, Telangana, India. 561 court orders on record since 2013. 3 judgments with full text available. Primarily handles OS, OP, EP cases.

561

Total Orders

Judgments

Orders/Month

Posting

Featured Judgments

SC/326/2015 Acquitted

PS Doulthabad vs Udithi Bixapathi

19 Aug 2016

IN THE COURT OF THE ASST. SESSIONS JUDGE:: AT SIDDIPET

PRESENT :: SRI. M. KRISHNA MURTHY,

Asst. Sessions Judge,

Siddipet.

FRIDAY, THE 19 TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2016

S.C.No. 326 of 2015

P.R.C. No., Cr. No. and P.S. ::P.R.C. No. 43 of 2015, Cr. No 126 of 2014 of Doulthabad Police Station.

Case committed by :: Prl. Judicial Magistrate First Class, Gajwel

Name of the accused ::

A1- Udithi Bixapathi s/o. Narsaiah, age 45 years, Caste:Mudiraj, Occ:Agriculture, R/o. Thimmakkapally village of Doulthabad Mandal.

A2- Thalla Sathish Goud s/o. Narsagiyd , age 24 years, Caste:Goud, Occ:Agriculture, R/o. Thimmakkapally village of Doulthabad Mandal.

(Particulars are mentioned as per charge sheet)

Offence of Charge ::Under Section 306, IPC against A1 and A2. Plea of accused ::Pleaded not guilty.

Finding of court::Found not guilty.

Sentence or Order ::

A1 and A2 are found not guilty for the offence punishable under

Section 306, IPC and under Section 235 (1) Cr.P.C., they are acquitted of the said offence. The accused shall be set at liberty and their bail bond shall stand cancelled after six months. The unmarked case property i.e., plastic tin shall be destroyed after appeal time or after appeal if any.

Prosecution conducted by ::Sri S. Thirupathi Reddy, Addl.P.P.

Accused defended by ::Sri S. Janardhan Reddy, Advocate.

This case coming before me on 19.08.2016 for final hearing in the presence of Sri S. Thirupathi Reddy, Addl. P.P. for State and of Sri S.Janardhan Reddy, Counsel for accused, upon perusing material papers on record, upon hearing arguments and the matter having been stood over for consideration to this day the court delivered the following:-

J U D G M E N T

This Sessions Case arose out of charge sheet filed by the Sub Inspector 2 of Police, Doulthabad Police Station before learned Prl. Judicial Magistrate of

First Class, Gajwel in Cr.No. 126 of 2014 for the offence punishable under

Section 306, IPC against A1 and A2 .

2.The prosecution case in brief as per charge sheet is as follows:-

The deceased Anandam is elder brother of P.W.1 and themselves and both the accused are residents of Thimmakkapally village. The daughter of

A1 by name Shirisha aged 16 years was suffering from ill-health since few days prior to the incident. A1 suspected the deceased that he was doing sorcery on his daughter and hence, she fell ill and her ill-health was not cured. Then A1 started threatening the deceased with dire consequences regularly. On 21.08.2014 A1 again threatened the deceased and put him in fear of life. Then the deceased went to the house of his mother-in-law at

Mallupally. At about 8.00 pm on the same day A1 and A2 went to Mallupally by holding knife and they tussled with deceased and beat him and threatened him to kill with knife which was carried by them. On the intervention of L.W.6/M.Srinu the accused left the deceased and went away.

Later the deceased came to Thimmakkapally village without informing to his in-laws and he was threatened internally in mind with the actions of accused that accused would kill him definitely and hence, he went to the outskirts of Raipole village, Doulthabad mandal and consumed poison (Chloropyriphos 20% E.c Tricel) and fell down losing consciousness . On receipt of information P.W.1 and his other family members shifted him to

Government Community Centre,Gajwel where he was given first aid and referred to Gandhi hospital, Secunderabad. He died there while undergoing treatment on 23.08.2014 at 1200 hours.

On the report of P.W.1 crime was registered and investigated into by the police. Witnesses were examined and their statements were recorded. Scene of offence was observed, plastic poison bottle was recovered in the 3 presence of mediators, rough sketch was prepared and the accused were arrested on 30.08.2014 and sent to court for remand. The doctor who conducted post mortem examination opined that the cause of death was due to Orthophosphate an insecticide poison. Hence, the charge.

3.Learned Prl. Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Gajwel took cognizance for the offence punishable under Section 306, IPC against accused and after furnishing copies of relevant documents to the accused u/S.207 Cr.P.C.

the said Magistrate committed the case u/S.209(a) Cr.P.C. to Hon'ble Principal

Court of Session, Sessions Division Medak at Sangareddy as the offence punishable u/Sec. 306, IPC is exclusively triable by a court of Session.

4.Hon'ble Principal Sessions Judge, Medak at Sangareddy registered the case and made over the same to this court for disposal according to law.

5.After appearance of the accused and after hearing both sides this court framed charge for the offence punishable Under Section 306, IPC against the accused read over and explained to them in Telugu. The accused pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.

6.In support of prosecution case P.Ws. 1 to 4 were got examined and

Exs. P1 to P3 were got exhibited.

7.After closure of the prosecution side evidence the accused were examined under Section 313, Cr.P.C. They denied the incriminating circumstances appearing against them in the prosecution side evidence.

and they reported no witnesses in defence.

8.Heard both sides.

9.The point for determination is whether the prosecution proved beyond reasonable doubt the guilt of accused for the offence punishable u/S. 306,

IPC.

10.POINT:-

P.W1. is the wife and P.W.2 is the son of the deceased. They only deposed that the deceased Anandam committed suicide about two years back. According to them he committed said suicide due to stomach-ache.

P.W.3 supported prosecution case. He is de facto complainant and he further deposed that he gave Ex.P3 report to police. P.W.4 is witness for observation of scene of offence and seizure of one liter tin of pesticide poison. But he did not support prosecution case. He deposed that he went to the place of death of deceased along with villagers, one constable enquired about his name, that police did not do anything before him and that he does not know how the deceased died. P.Ws 1,2 and 4 were cross- examined by learned Addl. Public Prosecutor after treating them hostile and in such cross-examination P..Ws 1 and 2 denied to have stated to police as in Exs P1 and P2 under Section 161, Cr.P.C that husband of P.W1 and father of P.W2 committed suicide as accused threatened to kill him stating that he was responsible for ill-health of daughter of A1 and as they attacked him with knife to kill him and beat him on 21.08.2014 and giving details. P.W.4 denied that police observed scene of offence and seized one liter tin of pesticide poison and prepared panchanama and rough sketch before him and that he affixed his thumb impression knowing their contents. P.Ws 1,2 and 4 denied that they were deposing falsely to help the accused. P.W3.

Deposed that about one year back the daughter of A1 suffered from fever, that A1 went to the house of Anandam and stated that he did Mantram (sorcery) against his daughter and asked him to cure illness of his daughter and threatened to kill him otherwise, that then his brother went to his in- laws' house at Mallupally village, that A1 and A2 went to Mallupally with knife, that A1 beat deceased with knife and hand, that A1 and A2 returned to their village as villagers sent them away, that deceased returned to their village in the night on the same day and committed suicide by consuming pesticide poison and later he gave Ex.P3 report police.

11.As P.Ws 1 and 2 who are wife and son of the deceased did not speak anything against the accused learned Addl. Public Prosecutor given up the evidence of other witnesses. Therefore, there is only evidence of P.W.3. In the cross-examination of P..W3 it is elicited that he did not witness the 5 accused attacking and threatening his brother and he came to know through his brother Anandam about accused threatening him. He does not know who scribed Ex.P3 i.e., whether police or private person. It is elicited from him that himself and his brother did not give any report about accused threatening his brother. Therefore, there is no direct evidence for the alleged threatening of the deceased by the accused. There is also no direct evidence for accused beating the deceased. On the other hand, the evidence of PWs 1 and 2 who are wife and son of the deceased clearly shows that the deceased committed suicide due to stomach-ache. If really, there was such threat the deceased or P.W.3 should have give report to police. Moreover, to establish the offence punishable under Section 306, IPC the prosecution has to established the ingredients of Section 107, IPC i.e., it has to be establish that the accused either intentionally aided the deceased in committing suicide by any act or illegal omission or the accused instigated the deceased to do that thing or the accused engaged in conspiracy for the commission of suicide by the deceased. If the allegation of prosecution that the accused threatened the deceased taken as true it would amount only to giving threat. By such threat itself the deceased cannot be expected to commit suicide. He was having remedy of taking action under law against the accused for such threat. He can give report to police or he can inform to village elders about the same. Moreover, there is no definite evidence to show that the accused continuously gave threats to the deceased so as to drive him to commit suicide. In the absence of such convincing evidence it cannot be said that threat of accused to the deceased abetted him to commit suicide. In addition to it as already stated the evidence prosecution witnesses is not consistent and the wife and son of the deceased i.e., P.Ws1 and 2 themselves gave go by to their earlier versions before the police and gave different statements before the court that the deceased committed suicide due to stomach-ache. In these circumstances it cannot be said that the accused abetted the deceased to 6 commit suicide.

12.For the above reasons the court holds that the prosecution failed to prove beyond reasonable doubt the guilt of accused for the offence punishable u/S. 306, IPC. Point is answered accordingly.

13.In the result, the A1 and A2 are found not guilty for the offence punishable under Section 306, IPC and under Section 235 (1) Cr.P.C., they are acquitted of the said offence. The accused shall be set at liberty and their bail bond shall stand cancelled after six months. The unmarked case property i.e., plastic tin shall be destroyed after appeal time or after appeal if any.

Dictated to the Stenographer Grade-II, transcribed by him, corrected

and pronounced by me in open court on this the 19th day of August, 2016.

ASSISTANT SESSIONS JUDGE,

SIDDIPET.

-:: APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE ::-

WITNESSES EXAMINED

FOR PROSECUTION:- FOR DEFENCE:-

PW1 U.Manemma - Nil - PW2U.Nagaraju PW3U.Swamynatham PW4G.Swamy

EXHIBITS MARKED

FOR PROSECUTION:- Ex. P123.08.2014 Statement of PW1 u/S. 161 Cr.P.C.

Ex. P223.08.2014 Statement of PW2 u/S. 161 Cr.P.C. Ex. P3 23.08.2014 Report said to have been given by PW3 to police.

FOR DEFENCE:- - Nil –

MATERIAL OBJECTS MARKED FOR PROSECUTION

Nil - 

ASSISTANT SESSIONS JUDGE,

SIDDIPET.

IN THE COURT OF THE ASSISTANT SESSIONS JUDGE::AT SIDDIPET

MEDAK DISTRICT

S.C.NO. 326 OF 2015

Between:- State through Station House Officer, Doulthabad Police Station …Complainant AND

...Accused

Cr. No.126 of 2014 of Doulthabad P.S for the offence punishable under Section 306,,IPC against accused in PRC No 43 of 2015 on the file of Prl. J.M.F.C. Gajwel.

Description of the Accused:-

A1- Udithi Bixapathi s/o. Narsaiah, age 45 years, Caste:Mudiraj, Occ:Agriculture, R/o. Thimmakkapally village of Doulthabad Mandal.

A2- Thalla Sathish Goud s/o. Narsagiyd , age 24 years, Caste:Goud, Occ:Agriculture, R/o. Thimmakkapally village of Doulthabad Mandal. Date of:-

1. Offence::23.08.2014

2. Complaint::23.08.2014

3. Apprehension /surrender :: 30.08.2014 of accused

4. Release of accused::17.09.2014

5. Committal::03.11.2015

6. Commencement of trial::09.08.2016

7. Close of Trial::19.08. 2016

8. Judgment delivered::19.08. 2016

8. Sentence or Order::

A1 and A2 are found not guilty for the offence punishable under Section 306, IPC and under Section 235 (1) Cr.P.C., they are acquitted of the said offence. The accused shall be set at liberty and their bail bond shall stand cancelled after six months. The unmarked case property i.e., plastic tin shall be destroyed after appeal time or after appeal if any

Assistant Sessions Judge, Siddipet. Copy Submitted to:

The Honourable Prl. District and Sessions Judge, Medak at Sangareddy.

Dis. No. Date .

OP/103/2015

Rondla Swapna vs Rondla Mahender Reddy

19 Aug 2016

IN THE COURT OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE :: AT SIDDIPET

PRESENT :: SRI M. KRISHNA MURTHY,

Senior Civil Judge,

Siddipet.

FRIDAY, THE 19 th DAY OF AUGUST, 2016

O.P. 103 OF 2015

Between : -

Smt.Rondla Swapna W/o Mahender Reddy, Age 24 years, Occu: Housewife, R/o Achumaipally village, Dubbak Mandal, Medak District. Now residing at her parents house at Appannapally village,

Dubbak Mandal, Medak district. ...Petitioner

A N D

Rondla Mahender Reddy S/o Penta Reddy, Age 34 years, Occu: Agriculture, R/o Achumaipally village, Dubbak Mandal, Medak District. …Respondent (Ages are mentioned as per the petition)

This petition coming before me on 19.08.2016 for final hearing in the presence of Sri B.S. Bapu Rao, Counsel for Petitioner and Sri J.Prathap Reddy, Counsel for Respondent upon perusing material papers on record, upon hearing arguments and the matter having stood over for consideration to this day the Court made the following:-

//O R D E R//

Petitioner is present. Respondent is not present. No representation.

Heard counsel for petitioner. Orders are passed on merits.

This petition is filed for divorce on the ground of cruelty on the part of respondent/husband. The petitioner/wife alleged that her marriage was performed on 24-05-2010 as per Hindu rites and community customs, that after 15 days thereafter, her husband harassed her by consuming liquor and by coming to house in late hours and by abusing her and by beating her demanding to bring additional dowry of rs.3 lakhs, that in February, 2011 her husband kicked her mercilessly though she was pregnant and due to same premature delivery was done and her son died, that in spite of panchayaths there is no change in the attitude of husband, that he pressed her neck and tried to kill her on 05-11-2011, that she received injuries on face and eyes, that she was necked out from the house by snatching gold 2 ornaments, that she also filed criminal case, that on the advice of elders she withdrew the criminal cases and maintenance case, that thereafter also the husband harassed her and that therefore, this petition is filed.

The respondent/husband denied the allegations of wife and filed elaborate counter contending that his wife filed a false case, that he is ready to maintain his wife, that his wife never attended to agricultural work, that she has no interest to lead marital life, that she is habituated to file cases, that elders found fault with her, that she likes model and modern life, that she is not attending to domestic work and that the petition may be dismissed.

As reconciliation efforts failed this court framed following points for enquiry:-

1) Whether the respondent/husband subjected the petitioner/wife to cruelty as alleged by petitioner/wife? (Or)

2) Whether the petitioner/wife is entitle to decree of divorce as prayed for by her?

3) To what relief?

The petitioner got herself examined as PW1 and she did not adduce any documentary evidence. Respondent did not adduce any evidence either oral or documentary.

POINTS 1 AND 2:-

The petitioner/wife in her evidence affidavit deposed in support of her case. Respondent did not choose to cross-examine her. Hence, her evidence is unrebutted. Her unrebutted evidence and absence of evidence of on the side of respondent proved the case of petitioner/wife. Hence, the court holds that the petitioner/wife proved that the respondent/husband subjected her to cruelty as alleged by her and the respondent/husband failed to prove that the petitioner subjected him to cruelty. The court further holds that the petitioner/wife proved that she is entitled to decree of divorce as prayed for by her. Points 1 and 2 are answered accordingly.

POINT No.3

In view of the findings of the court on Points 1 and 2 the court holds that the petition has to be allowed directing both parties to bear their own cots in the facts and circumstance of the case. This point is answered accordingly.

In the result, the petition is allowed and there shall be a decree dissolving the marriage of the petitioner with the respondent. In the facts and circumstances, both parties are directed to bear their own costs.

Pronounced by me in the open court on this the 19th day of August, 2016.

Sd/-

Senior Civil Judge,

Siddipet.

-:: APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE ::-

WITNESSES EXAMINED

FOR PETITIONER

PW1Smt.Rondla Swapna

FOR RESPONDENT

- None -

EXHIBITS MARKED

FOR PETITIONER:-

- Nil -

FOR RESPONDENT:-

- Nil -

Sd/-

Senior Civil Judge,

Siddipet.

DECREE IN ORIGINAL PETITION

IN THE COURT OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE :: AT SIDDIPET

PRESENT :: SRI M. KRISHNA MURTHY,

Senior Civil Judge,

Siddipet.

FRIDAY, THE 19 th DAY OF AUGUST, 2016

O.P. 103 OF 2015

Between : -

Smt.Rondla Swapna W/o Mahender Reddy, Age 24 years, Occu: Housewife, R/o Achumaipally village, Dubbak Mandal, Medak District. Now residing at her parents house at Appannapally village, Dubbak Mandal, Medak district.

...Petitioner

A N D

Rondla Mahender Reddy S/o Penta Reddy, Age 34 years, Occu: Agriculture, R/o Achumaipally village, Dubbak Mandal, Medak District. …Respondent (Ages are mentioned as per the petition)

Claim: Petition filed under Section 13 (1) (ia) of Hindu Marriage Act, praying to pass a decree for divorce dissolving the marriage between the petitioner and respondent and costs.

Court Fee: of Rs. 10-00 is paid under Article 1 (vii), Schedule II of A.P. Court

Fees and Suits Valuation Act.

Cause of action: Arose on 05-11-2011 the respondent tried to kill the petitioner and also the respondent is refused to lead marital life with the petitioner.

Petition presented on : 07-07-2015

Petition Registered on : 13-07-2015

DECREE:-

This petition coming before me on this the day for final hearing in the presence of Sri B.S. Bapu Rao, Counsel for Petitioner and Sri J.Prathap

Reddy, Counsel for Respondent upon perusing material papers on record, upon hearing arguments and the matter having stood over for consideration to this day, the Court doth order and decree that:

1.the petition be and is hereby allowed;

2. the marriage of the petitioner with the respondent be and is hereby dissolved by this decree of divorce;

3. the parties be and are hereby directed to bear their own costs.

Given under my hand and seal of the court on this the 19th day of August, 2016.

Sd/-

Senior Civil Judge,

Siddipet.

PARTICULARS OF COSTS

Sl.No.Description For Petitioner For Respondent

1.Stamps on petition Rs.10-00-

2.Stamps on vakalathRs. 2-00Rs.2-00 Pleader's fee

3.(Fee certificate and cost memo -- not filed)

4.Service of processRs.35-00-

5.Miscellaneous–– TotalRs.47-00Rs.2-00

Sd/-

Senior Civil Judge,

Siddipet.

H.M.O.P/69/2016

Balla Nagaraju vs Balla Sheshikala

22 Aug 2016

Order Record 557 total

Case No.	Parties	Date	Type	Outcome
H.M.O.P/69/2016	Balla Nagaraju vs Balla Sheshikala	22 Aug 2016	Dismissed	—
OP/103/2015	Rondla Swapna vs Rondla Mahender Reddy	19 Aug 2016	Allowed	—
OP/144/2015	Akkasani Kavitha vs Akkasani Mahipal Reddy	19 Aug 2016	Allowed	—
SC/247/2015	Siddipet II Town Police Station vs A1. Mohd.Naseeroddin	19 Aug 2016	Aquittal	—
SC/326/2015	PS Doulthabad vs Udithi Bixapathi	19 Aug 2016	Aquittal	Acquitted
OS/52/2016	Panjala Yadagiri Goud vs Panjala Balamani	11 Aug 2016	Dismissed	—
H.M.O.P/166/2015	Bajaru Muthyalu Goud vs Bajaru Narsamma	11 Aug 2016	Allowed	—
IP/3/2016	Jejala Yadagiri Goud vs Komuravelly Suresh	10 Aug 2016	Dismissed for Default	—
SC/289/2015	Rajgopalpet Police Station vs Gangaraboina Kanakaiah	10 Aug 2016	Aquittal	—
H.M.O.P/25/2016	Burgula alias Pothireddy Ramadevi vs Burugula Balaram Reddy	10 Aug 2016	Allowed	—
OS/220/2012	Harikishan Baldawa vs Kothula Sathyam	09 Aug 2016	Dismissed for Default	—
H.M.O.P/84/2016	Kanganti Prabhakar vs Kanganti Swapna	09 Aug 2016	Decreed as prayed for	—
OS/69/2012	Reddy Malla Reddy vs Etla Kanakaiah	08 Aug 2016	Decreed	—
OS/91/2014	C. Leela Kumari vs M. Suguna	08 Aug 2016	Dismissed for Default	—
H.M.O.P/53/2016	Kalimeli Umarani vs Kalimeli Sanjeeva Reddy	08 Aug 2016	Allowed	—
H.M.O.P/4/2016	Byroju Kumara Swamy vs Byroju Lavanya alias Sandhya	05 Aug 2016	Dismissed	—
H.M.O.P/16/2016	Kasula Aruna alias Swetha vs Manne Vijay Kumar	04 Aug 2016	Allowed	—
H.M.O.P/8/2016	Dara Shekar vs Dara Ramya alias Ramavva	03 Aug 2016	Dismissed for Default	—
H.M.O.P/24/2016	Domala Samba Shiva Rao vs Domala Sujatha	03 Aug 2016	Dismissed for Default	—
H.M.O.P/28/2016	Bitla Swetha vs Jangam Sathish	02 Aug 2016	Allowed	—
OP/121/2015	Ganapathi Bixapathi vs Ganapathi Laxmi	01 Aug 2016	Dismissed for Default	—
SC/32/2016	PS Siddipet-1 Town vs A1. Mohd.Hasmad	01 Aug 2016	Aquittal	—
H.M.O.P/66/2016	Sandiri Narender Reddy vs Sandiri Sushma	01 Aug 2016	Allowed	—
H.M.O.P/17/2016	Tatiparthi Roshma vs Tatiparthi Mahender Reddy	28 Jul 2016	Allowed	—
OS/48/2016	Chintha Srinivas vs Yamsani Rajashekhar	27 Jul 2016	Allowed	—
SC/125/2016	PS Siddipet II Town vs Gaddam Bhanu	27 Jul 2016	Aquittal	—
H.M.O.P/54/2016	Kodaparthi alias Sakali Karnaker vs Kodaparthi alias Sakali Kanaka Laxmi	27 Jul 2016	Allowed	—
IP/16/2015	Shivva Srikanth vs Deepak Lahotti	25 Jul 2016	Allowed	—
OP/40/2016	Teegala Padma vs Teegala Devendar Goud	25 Jul 2016	Allowed	—
H.M.O.P/48/2016	Konthanpally Laxman vs Smt.Konthanpally Narsamma	22 Jul 2016	Allowed	—
H.M.O.P/51/2016	Gurram Sandhya vs Gurram Rajireddy	22 Jul 2016	Allowed	—
H.M.O.P/52/2016	Gurijala Kavyasri alias Kanakathara vs Gurijala Raju	22 Jul 2016	Allowed	—
H.M.O.P/55/2016	Thatikonda Pothuluraiah Chary vs Thatikonda Divya Jyothi	21 Jul 2016	Dismissed	—
H.M.O.P/27/2016	Godala Srikanth Reddy vs Godala Swetha	20 Jul 2016	Allowed	—
H.M.O.P/162/2015	Perumandla Manjula vs Perumandla Ravinder	20 Jul 2016	Allowed	—
SC/25/2016	PS Gajwel vs S. Rajesh Kumar	19 Jul 2016	Aquittal	—
SC/316/2015	PS Begumpet vs Shatagalla Sathish Kumar	19 Jul 2016	Order On Exgibit	—
H.M.O.P/11/2016	Singam Sunitha vs Singam Santhosh Kumar	18 Jul 2016	Allowed	—
IP/15/2015	Panjala Krishna Goud vs Chithala Anjaneyulu	15 Jul 2016	Dismissed for Default	—
OS/47/2012	Etikyala Kousalya vs Ananthoju Rajamani	15 Jul 2016	Dismissed	—
SC/112/2015	Siddipet II Town Police Station vs Jindam Siddi Ramulu	13 Jul 2016	Aquittal	—
EP/18/2015	Sarasam Srinivas Reddy vs Thumukunta Venkatesh Yadav	12 Jul 2016	Dismissed	—
OP/41/2015	Daripally Durga Prasad vs Daripally Valalaxmi alias Mounika	11 Jul 2016	Allowed	—
OP/45/2016	Kamuni alias Karne Rajeshwari vs Kamuni Raju	11 Jul 2016	Allowed	—
H.M.O.P/29/2016	Panja Naga Laxmi vs Panja Kishan	11 Jul 2016	Dismissed for Default	—
H.M.O.P/47/2016	Dhathrika Nagaraju vs Dhathrika Kavitha	08 Jul 2016	Dismissed for Default	—
SC/342/2014	Chinnakodur Police Station vs A1. Gurram Rajalingam Goud	27 Jun 2016	Aquittal	—
OS/175/2012	Hanmandla Pushpamala vs Ponnala Bhaskar Reddy	23 Jun 2016	Decreed as prayed for	—
H.M.O.P/32/2016	Bathini Mounika vs Bathini Pranav Kumar Goud	10 Jun 2016	Allowed	—
H.M.O.P/160/2015	Doddoji Saraswathi vs Doddoji Surender	09 Jun 2016	Allowed	—
SC/250/2015	Gowraram Police Station vs Devaganika Sapraveen	08 Jun 2016	Aquittal	—
SC/216/2015	Siddipet-II Town vs Nyalapogula Ramachander	02 Jun 2016	Aquittal	—
SC/278/2015	Siddipet II Town Police Station vs Gyadari Ramulu alias Ramu	02 Jun 2016	Aquittal	—
SC/288/2015	Siddipet II Town Police Station vs Pedishetty Mallesham	01 Jun 2016	Aquittal	—
OP/42/2015	Deshetti Raju vs Deshetti Santhoshi	27 Apr 2016	Dismissed	—
OS/24/2014	G. Durgamma alias Lakshmi vs Dyagala Kumar	27 Apr 2016	Dismissed	—
L.A.O.P/90/2012	Paruchuri Bhagya Laxmi vs Spl Deputy Collector L.A	27 Apr 2016	Decreed as prayed for	—
OP/155/2015	Gurrala Indira alias Renuka vs Gurrala Anjaiah	26 Apr 2016	Dismissed for Default	—
OS/148/2014	Sriram Renuka vs Kuthadi Mallesham	26 Apr 2016	Dismissed for Default	—
OP/118/2015	Kaveti Vijay Kumar vs Kaveti Sridevi	25 Apr 2016	Dismissed	—
OS/104/2010	Maniu Bai vs M.Bharathi Bai	25 Apr 2016	Dismissed	—
SC/274/2015	Kukunoopally Police Station vs Dummala Durga Praveen	22 Apr 2016	Convicted	—
SC/265/2015	Siddipet-I Town Police Station vs A1. Mudarakola Shashi Kumar	20 Apr 2016	Aquittal	—
OS/222/2012	Harikishan Baldawa vs Gundla Raju	19 Apr 2016	Dismissed for Default	—
OS/219/2012	Harikishan Baldawa vs Ram Kumar Pawar	18 Apr 2016	Dismissed for Default	—
SC/246/2015	Siddipet I Town Police Station vs Kompelly Thirupathi	18 Apr 2016	Aquittal	—
SC/298/2015	Doulthabad Police Station vs Dasari Naresh	18 Apr 2016	Aquittal	—
OS/139/2014	Nagoth Showri Raju vs Nayakam Srinivas	13 Apr 2016	Decreed as prayed for	—
SC/198/2015	Thoguta Police Station vs A1. Manne Bhagaiah	13 Apr 2016	Aquittal	—
EP/30/2010	Muramshetti Siddaiah vs Patel Ashok Reddy	11 Apr 2016	Dismissed	—
OS/202/2012	Kapil Chit Fund Pvt. Ltd vs R. Bal Reddy	04 Apr 2016	Dismissed with costs	—
F.C.O.P/75/2014	P. Ramakrishna Reddy vs Purumandla Anitha alias Komati Anitha	04 Apr 2016	Allowed	—
SC/200/2015	Bhoompally Police Station vs Dudekula Saleem	01 Apr 2016	Aquittal	—
SC/358/2014	Gajwel Police Station vs Y.V. Nagachaitanya	01 Apr 2016	Aquittal	—
L.A.O.P/75/2012	Bongu Mallesham vs Special Deputy Collector	31 Mar 2016	Decreed as prayed for	—
OP/17/2015	Baindla Parsharamulu vs Baindla Sheshireka alias Rajitha	30 Mar 2016	Dismissed	—
SC/214/2015	Siddipet I Town Police Station vs Pusala Vijay	30 Mar 2016	Aquittal	—
OP/74/2015	Barla Sreelatha vs Gajje Thirupathi	29 Mar 2016	Dismissed for Default	—
OP/116/2015	Bandoji Krishna Murthy vs Bandoji Rama Devi	29 Mar 2016	Dismissed	—
OS/124/2012	Katkuri Gonaiah vs Katkuri Chandraiah	22 Mar 2016	Dismissed	—
SC/195/2015	Toopran Police Station vs Bitla Vittal	21 Mar 2016	Aquittal	—
EP/35/2014	Shriram City Union Finance Limited vs K. Ravindra	17 Mar 2016	Dismissed	—
OS/119/2014	Donthula Pushpavathi vs Donthula Rajaiah alias Rajeshwar	17 Mar 2016	Decreed as prayed for	—
SC/88/2015	Doulthabad Police Station vs Vema Anjaneyulu	16 Mar 2016	Aquittal	—
IP/1/2014	Kodipyaka Hari Kishan vs Kammari Raghava	04 Mar 2016	Allowed	—
OS/66/2010	Lagishetti Chakrapani vs Mushnam Vikram	03 Mar 2016	Decreed as prayed for	—
OS/72/2014	Andhra Bank vs Shabana alias Shabana Maqbool	01 Mar 2016	Decreed	—
EP/46/2012	Kapil Chit funds Pvt.Ltd. vs N.Sathyanarayana	26 Feb 2016	Decreed as prayed for	—
OP/122/2015	Gandra Srinivas vs Gandra Lavanya alias Nagarani	24 Feb 2016	Allowed	—
OS/58/2009	Durgam Laxminarayana vs Chakali Venkataiah alias Mamindla Venkataiah	24 Feb 2016	Decreed as prayed for	—
EP/10/2014	Ms. Cholamandalam Investments and Finance Company vs Abdul Jabbar	23 Feb 2016	Dismissed	—
OP/87/2015	Dondadi Ramesh vs Dondadi Anitha alias Padma	23 Feb 2016	Petition is allowed	—
OP/114/2014	Gudolla Kanakaiah vs Guddola Shobha Rani	19 Feb 2016	Dismissed with costs	—
OS/27/2014	Thati Narayana vs Ms. Rajeshwara Traders, Gajwel	19 Feb 2016	Dismissed	—
EP/1/2014	Kapil Chit Fund Hyd P Ltd. vs P. Srinivas Chary	18 Feb 2016	Dismissed	—
EP/33/2014	Ms. Shriram City Union Finance Limited vs Ch. Chandra Shekar	16 Feb 2016	Dismissed	—
OS/152/2013	Mohd. Syed Ishaq vs Asad Moinuddin	15 Feb 2016	Dismissed for Default	—
EP/31/2014	Ms. Shriram City Union Finance Limited vs B. Srinivas Reddy	12 Feb 2016	Dismissed	—
OP/89/2014	Billa Surekha vs Billa Srinivas	12 Feb 2016	Allowed	—
OP/157/2015	Kondapuram Srinivas vs Smt.Boini Bhoolaxmi	12 Feb 2016	Dismissed for Default	—

Showing 100 of 557 orders — Log in to browse all pages.

Monthly Orders (Last 12 Months)

Aug 2016		23
Jul 2016		24
Jun 2016		9
Apr 2016		21
Mar 2016		13
Feb 2016		27
Jan 2016		18
Dec 2015		20
Nov 2015		18
Oct 2015		17
Sep 2015		11
Aug 2015		15

Frequently Asked Questions

How many cases has SRI M KRISHNA MURTHY handled?

SRI M KRISHNA MURTHY has handled 561 court orders since 2013 at Siddipet, PDJ Court Complex. The average disposal rate is 14 orders per month.

What types of cases does SRI M KRISHNA MURTHY hear?

Based on available records, SRI M KRISHNA MURTHY primarily handles Civil matters (Original Suits, Original Petitions) and Criminal matters (Sessions Cases) at Siddipet, PDJ Court Complex.

Where is SRI M KRISHNA MURTHY currently posted?

SRI M KRISHNA MURTHY is posted as Senior Civil Judge Siddipet at Siddipet, PDJ Court Complex, Siddipet, Telangana.

Are judgments by SRI M KRISHNA MURTHY available online?

Yes. 3 judgments by SRI M KRISHNA MURTHY are available on Legistro with full text, outcome, and sections cited.

How fast does SRI M KRISHNA MURTHY dispose cases?

SRI M KRISHNA MURTHY disposes approximately 14 cases per month, based on 561 orders handled over their tenure at Siddipet, PDJ Court Complex.

Since when is SRI M KRISHNA MURTHY serving?

SRI M KRISHNA MURTHY has been serving at Siddipet, PDJ Court Complex since 2013.

Case Types

OS 40%

OP 22%

EP 15%

H 14%

SC 5%

IP 3%

L 1%

F 0%

Posting History

May 2013 — Sep 2016

Senior Civil Judge Siddipet · 561 orders

Outcomes on Record

Acquitted 1

Other Judges at this Court

Sri.Y.Jaya Prasad

I Additional District and Sessions Judge, Siddipe...

343 orders

Smt K. Sai Rama Devi

Prinicpal District and Siddipet Sessions Judge, Si...

360 orders

Mrs. Bollepally Sadhana

Principal Junior Civil Judge cum Judicial Magistr...

217 orders

Vemuganti Tharani

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

288 orders

Smt.K.Sowjanya

II Additional Junior Civil Judge-cum-Judicial Magi...

5 orders

Sri N Santosh Kumar

Principal Senior Civil Siddipet Judge-cum- Assista...

128 orders

Sri A. Kumara Swamy

Additional Senior Civil Judge cum Additional Assis...

0 orders

← View all judges at Siddipet, PDJ Court Complex

Sri M Krishna Murthy

PRESENT :: SRI. M. KRISHNA MURTHY,

Siddipet.

FRIDAY, THE 19 TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2016

S.C.No. 326 of 2015

J U D G M E N T

ASSISTANT SESSIONS JUDGE,

SIDDIPET.

-:: APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE ::-

WITNESSES EXAMINED

EXHIBITS MARKED

MATERIAL OBJECTS MARKED FOR PROSECUTION

ASSISTANT SESSIONS JUDGE,

SIDDIPET.

MEDAK DISTRICT

S.C.NO. 326 OF 2015

Siddipet.

FRIDAY, THE 19 th DAY OF AUGUST, 2016

O.P. 103 OF 2015

//O R D E R//

-:: APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE ::-

WITNESSES EXAMINED

FOR PETITIONER

FOR RESPONDENT

EXHIBITS MARKED

DECREE IN ORIGINAL PETITION

Siddipet.

FRIDAY, THE 19 th DAY OF AUGUST, 2016

O.P. 103 OF 2015

PARTICULARS OF COSTS

THE COURT OF SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE :: SIDDIPET.

Claim:- Petition filed U/s 13(1)(ia)(ib) of Hindu Marriage Act for

Dissolution

PRL. SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE

SIDDIPET