Smt.M.Sandhya Rani

Senior Civil Judge-cum-Assistant Sessions Judge

Shadnagar, ADJ Court Complex · Rangareddy · Telangana

Smt.M.Sandhya Rani, Senior Civil Judge-cum-Assistant Sessions Judge, is posted at Shadnagar, ADJ Court Complex, Rangareddy, Telangana, India. 379 court orders on record since 2019. 5 judgments with full text available. Primarily handles OS, CC, DVC cases.

379

Total Orders

Judgments

Orders/Month

Postings

Featured Judgments

OS/68/2021

Smt.K.Vakula Alias Kareddy Mamatha vs Tahsildar Tahsildar Office

28 Jun 2021

OS No.68/2021

IN THE COURT OF THE JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE

CYBERABAD AT HAYAHTNAGAR

PRESENT : SMT.M.SANDYA RANI,

JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE,

DATED THIS THE 28 TH DAY OF JUNE,2021

O.S.No.68 of 2021

Between:

1.Smt.K.Vakula Alias Kareddy Mamatha wife of late K.Narotham Reddy, Aged about 45 years, Occ:Housewife, R/o.Plot No.5, Flat No.401, Siri Sampada Apartments, Agriculture Colony, Hasthinapuram, Vanastalipuram, Ranga Reddy District, Telengana State – 500070.

2.Kareddy Sushma Daughter of late K.Narotham Reddy, Aged about 25 years, Occ:Student, R/o.Plot No.5, Flat No.401, Siri Sampada Apartments, Agriculture Colony, Hasthinapuram, Vanastalipuram, Rangareddy District, Telengana State -500070.

3.K.Ravi Prakash Reddy son of late K.Narotham Reddy, Aged about 22 years, Occ:Student, R/o.Plot No.5, Flat No.401, Siri Sampada Apartments, Agriculture Colony, Hasthinapuram, Vanastalipuram, Ranga Reddy District, Telengana State-500070. ….Plaintiffs

AND

1. Tahsildar, Tahsildar Office, Abdullapurmet Mandal, Ranga Reddy District, Telengana State.

2.All concerned. ….Defendants

This suit is coming before me on 21-06-2021 for final hearing in the presence of Sri B.Narender Goud, Advocate for plaintiffs and defendant no.1 set expartee and paper publication filed for defendant no.2 and defendant no.2 called absent and no representation and having heard and stood over for consideration, this Court made the following:

J U D G M E N T

1. This is a suit for declaration to declare that the plaintiffs are the absolute owners and possessors of the suit schedule ‘A” to ‘C’ properties being the legal heirs of deceased K.Narotham Reddy, who died on 02-09-2020.

OS No.68/2021

2. The brief facts of plaintiffs as mentioned in the plaint is that plaintiff no.1 is the wife and plaintiff No.2 and 3 are the children of deceased

K.Narotham Reddy, who died on 02-09-2020, leaving behind the plaintiffs as his legal heirs and successors of his entire state and except the plaintiffs there are no other legal heirs of deceased K.Narotham Reddy.

3. The plaintiffs further submitted that during the life time, the deceased

K.Narotham Reddy purchased suit schedule ‘A’ to ‘C’ properties through a registered sale deeds bearing document No.3238/2016, dated 12-02-2016, 4973/2016, dated 15-7-2016 and 7354/2018, dated 24-05-2018. Since the date of purchase, the deceased K.Narotham Reddy has been in peaceful possession and enjoyment of the said properties. After the demise of deceased K.Narotham Reddy plaintiffs were enjoying the suit schedule properties in the capacity of legal heirs.

4. The plaintiffs further stated that after the death of deceased K.Narotham

Reddy the plaintiffs intended to alienate suit schedule property to the third parties. But they demanded to produce the legal heirs certificate from the competent court. Having no other option, the plaintiffs filed present suit and to declare the plaintiffs are the legal heirs of deceased K.Narotham

Reddy.

5. The point for consideration: “Whether the plaintiffs are entitled to be

declared as legal heirs of deceased K.Narotham Reddy or not?

6. The plaintiff no.1 by name Smt.K.akula Alias Kareedy Mamatha filed chief affidavit in lieu of her chief examination and Exs.A1 to A7 were marked.

This court perused the Ex.A1 to A9 documents they are as follows:

Ex.A1 is the original death certificate of late K.Narotham Reddy, dated 2- 9-2020, issued by Registrar of Department of Health Medical GHMC,

Telengana, dated 18-01-2021 is proving the death of deceased.

OS No.68/2021

Ex.A2 is the attested copies of aadhar cards of plaintiff Nos.1 to 3 and attested copy of Pan Card of plaintiff No.1 is proving the relationship between the deceased and the plaintiffs.

Ex.A3 is the certified copy of sale deed vide doc.No.3238/2016, dated 12- 02-2016 in favour of deceased K.Narotham Reddy.

Ex.A4 is the certified copy of sale deed vide doc.No.4973/2016, dated 15-7- 2016 in favour of deceased K.Narotham Reddy.

Ex.A5 is the certified copy of Gift Deed vide document No.7354/2018,

dated 24-05-2018 in favour of deceased K.Narotham Reddy.

Ex.A6 is the encumbrance certificate of suit schedule property -A from 1- 10-2007 to 22-01-2021, dated 23-01-2021 SRO, Vanastalipuram.

Ex.A7 is the encumbrance certificate of suit schedule property -B from 1- 10-2007 to 22-01-2021, dated 23-01-2021 SRO, Vanastalipuram.

Ex.A8 is the encumbrance certificate of suit schedule property -C from 1- 10-2007 to 22-01-2021, dated 23-01-2021 SRO, Vanastalipuram.

Ex.A9 is the market valuation certificate of suit schedule property A to C

dated 21-01-2021, SRO, Vanastalipuram.

7. Notice served to defendant no.1. Defendant no.1 called absent, set expartee on 19-3-2021 and Paper publication filed for defendant no.2 and defendant no.2 called absent and no representation.

8. The entire oral as well as documentary evidence on record led by the plaintiffs remained unrebutted and unchallenged on the record in the light of the fact that the defendants has opted not to contest the claim of the plaintiffs, meaning thereby that they have indirectly admitted the claim of the plaintiffs. Moreover, there is no reason to discard the entire oral as well as documentary evidence on the record. Hence, in the light of aforesaidunrebuttedand unchallenged oralaswellas documentary evidence on the record, the plaintiffs are entitled to declare 4

OS No.68/2021

them as legal heirs of deceased K.Narotham Reddy. Accordingly, the point is answered in favour of plaintiffs as against the defendants.

9. In the result, suit is decreed in favour of plaintiffs and hereby declaring that the plaintiffs are the absolute owners and possessors of the suit schedule ‘A’ to ‘C’ properties being the legal heirs of deceasedK.Narotham Reddy, who died on 02-09-2020.

Typed to dictation to the Stenographer, corrected and pronounced by me in the open Court on this the 28th day of June, 2021.

JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE,

CYBERABAD AT HAYATHNAGAR

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

WITNESSES EXAMINED

FOR PLAINTIFFS: FOR

DEFENDANTs

PW-1:Smt.K.Vakula Alias Kareddy Mamatha-None-

EXHIBITS MARKED

FOR PLAINTIFFS: FOR DEFENDANTs: -Nil-

Ex.A1 is the original death certificate of late K.Narotham Reddy, dated 2- 9-2020, issued by Registrar of Department of Health Medical GHMC,

Telengana, dated 18-01-2021 is proving the death of deceased.

Ex.A2 is the attested copies of aadhar cards of plaintiff Nos.1 to 3 and attested copy of Pan Card of plaintiff No.1 is proving the relationship between the deceased and the plaintiffs.

Ex.A3 is the certified copy of sale deed vide doc.No.3238/2016, dated 12- 02-2016 in favour of deceased K.Narotham Reddy.

Ex.A4 is the certified copy of sale deed vide doc.No.4973/2016, dated 15-7- 2016 in favour of deceased K.Narotham Reddy.

OS No.68/2021

Ex.A5 is the certified copy of Gift Deed vide document No.7354/2018,

dated 24-05-2018 in favour of deceased K.Narotham Reddy.

Ex.A6 is the encumbrance certificate of suit schedule property -A from 1- 10-2007 to 22-01-2021, dated 23-01-2021 SRO, Vanastalipuram.

Ex.A7 is the encumbrance certificate of suit schedule property -B from 1- 10-2007 to 22-01-2021, dated 23-01-2021 SRO, Vanastalipuram.

Ex.A8 is the encumbrance certificate of suit schedule property -C from 1- 10-2007 to 22-01-2021, dated 23-01-2021 SRO, Vanastalipuram.

Ex.A9 is the market valuation certificate of suit schedule property A to C

dated 21-01-2021, SRO, Vanastalipuram.

JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE

CYBERABAD AT HAYATHNAGAR

OS No.68/2021

DECREE IN ORIGINAL SUIT

IN THE COURT OF THE JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE

CYBERABAD AT HAYAHTNAGAR

PRESENT : SMT.M.SANDYA RANI,

JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE,

DATED THIS THE 28 TH DAY OF JUNE,2021

O.S.No.68 of 2021

Between:

1.Smt.K.Vakula Alias Kareddy Mamatha wife of late K.Narotham Reddy, Aged about 45 years, Occ:Housewife, R/o.Plot No.5, Flat No.401, Siri Sampada Apartments, Agriculture Colony, Hashinapuram, Vanastalipuram, Ranga Reddy District, Telengana State – 500070.

AND

1. Tahsildar, Tahsildar Office, Abdullapurmet Mandal, Ranga Reddy District, Telengana State.

2.All concerned. ….Defendants

CLAIM: Suit for declaration filed by plaintiffs and declaring that they are the absolute owners and possessors of suit schedule ‘A’ to ‘C’ properties being the legal heirs of deceasedK.Narotham Reddy, who died on 02-09-2020.

CAUSE OF ACTION: The cause of action on 02-09-2020 when late K.Narotham Reddy and when the defendant no.1 denied the legal status of the plaintiffs.

VALUATION: The suit is valued as per the market value of suit schedule property ‘A’ is valued at Rs.2,00,000/- and half of the market value comes to Rs.1,00,000/-, market value of suit schedule property ‘B’ is valued at Rs.2,00,000/- and half of the market value comes to Rs.1,00,000/- and market value of suit schedule property ‘C’ is valued at Rs.2,00,000/- and half of the market value comes to Rs.1,00,000/- and total value of suit is valued at Rs.6,00,000/- and half of the market vales comes to Rs.3,00,000/- and paid a 7

OS No.68/2021

Court fee of Rs.5,426/- under section 24(b) of APCF ans SV Act, which is sufficient.

Suit presented on: 29-01-2021

Suit numbered on: 29-01-2021

This suit is coming before me on 21-06-2021 for final hearing in the presence of Sri B.Narender Goud, Advocate for plaintiffs and defendant no.1 set expartee and paper publication filed for defendant no.2 and defendant no.2 called absent and no representation and stood over for consideration, this court doth the decree as follows:

1.That the suit of the plaintiffs be and the same is hereby decreed in favour of plaintiffs and hereby declaring that the absolute owners and possessors of the suit schedule ‘A’ to ‘C’ properties being the legal heirs of deceasedK.Narotham Reddy, who died on 02-09-2020.

2.That there is no order as to costs.

Given under my hand and seal on this the 28th day of June, 2021.

JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE

CYBERABAD AT HAYATHNAGAR

MEMO OF COSTS

FOR PLAINTIFFs FOR DEFENDANTs

1. Stamp on plaintRs. 5426-00

2. Stamp on VakalathRs. 152-00 Defendants are

3. Stamp on ExhibitsRs.Called absent

4. Stamp on processRs. 110-00

5. Publication ChargesRs.

6. Advocate fees Sr.Rs.

7. Advocate fees. Jr.Rs.

8. Misc/preparation chargesRs. TotalRs. 5,688-00

JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE

CYBERABAD AT HAYATHNAGAR

SUIT SCHEDULE ‘A’ PROPERTY

All that property open land vide Plot bearing No.193, admeasuring 200 square yards or equivalent to 167.23 square meters, in Survey Nos.510, 511 and 512/1, situated at Turkayamjal Village, Hayathnagar Revenue Mandal,

Rangareddy District under Ragannaguda Gram Panchayath and bounded :

North:Plot No.192

South:Plot No.194

East :30’ wide road

West:Plot No.176 8

OS No.68/2021

SUIT SCHEDULE ‘B’ PROPERTY

All that property open land vide Plot bearing No.8, admeasuring 200 square yards or equivalent to 167.23 square meters, in Survey Nos.19/A1 and 19/A2, situated at Manneguda Village, Hayathnagar Revenue Mandal, Rangareddy

District and bounded :

North:Neighbours land

South:Plot No.7

East :30’ wide road

West:Plot No.2

SUIT SCHEDULE ‘C’ PROPERTY

All that property open land vide Plot bearing No.195, admeasuring 200 square yards or equivalent to 167.23 square meters, in Survey Nos.235/A and 236/A, situated at Kammaguda, Turkayamjal Village, Abdullapurmet Revenue

Mandal, Rangareddy District under Kammaguda Gram Panchayath and bounded :

North:Plot No.194

South:Plot No.196

East :25’ wide road

West:Plot No.214

JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE

CYBERABAD AT HAYATHNAGAR

OS/90/2021

M.Venu Gopal Rao vs All Concerned

28 Jun 2021

OS No.90/2021

IN THE COURT OF THE JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE

CYBERABAD AT HAYAHTNAGAR

PRESENT : SMT.M.SANDYA RANI,

JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE,

DATED THIS THE 29 TH DAY OF JUNE,2021

O.S.No.90 of 2021

Between: 1.M.Venu Gopal Rao, S/o.M.Ranga Rao, Aged: 78 years, Occ:Retired Employee, R/o.H.No.1-9-291/6/1, Vidya Nagar, Near Post Office, Hyderabad.

2.Sirisha Mitnala, D/o.M.Venu Gopal Rao, Aged: 44 years, Occ:Employee, R/o.H.No.2-2-20/K/9, Flat No.3A, Golden Towers Elite-1, D.D.Colony, Amberpet, Hyderabad.

3.Sathyamangal Sangeeta, D/o.M.Venu Gopal Rao, Aged: 42 years, Occupation:Employee, R/o.H.No.2-2-18/20/6, Flat No.301, Goutham Residency, D.D.Colony, Hyderabad. ….Plaintiffs

AND

1.All concerned.

2. The Tahsildar, Abdullapurmet Mandal, R.R.District. ….Defendants

This suit is coming before me on 11-06-2021 for final hearing in the presence of Sri K.Srinivas Reddy, Advocate for plaintiffs and defendant no.2 reported by AGP and reported no objection and paper publication filed for defendant no.1 and defendant no.1 called absent and no representation and having heard and stood over for consideration, this Court made the following:

J U D G M E N T

1. This is a suit for declaration to declare that the plaintiffs are the absolute owners and possessors of the suit schedule ‘A’ and ‘B’ properties being the legal heirs of deceased Mitnala Susheela, who died on 23-01-2015.

2. The brief facts of plaintiffs as mentioned in the plaint is that plaintiff no.1 is the husband and plaintiff No.2 and 3 are the children of deceased

Mitnala Susheela W/o.M.Venu Gopal Rao, who died on 23-01-2015, leaving behind the plaintiffs as her legal heirs and successors of her entire state 2

OS No.90/2021

and except the plaintiffs there are no other legal heirs of deceased

Mitnala Susheela.

3. The plaintiffs further submitted that during the life time, the deceased

Mitnala Susheela purchased suit schedule ‘A’ and ‘B’ properties through a registered sale deeds bearing document Nos.4921/1981, dated 4-7-1981 and 4922/1981, dated 4-4-1981. Since the date of purchase, the deceased

Mitnala Susheela has been in peaceful possession and enjoyment of the said properties. After the demise of deceased Mitnala Susheela plaintiffs were enjoying the suit schedule ‘A’ and ‘B’ properties in the capacity of legal heirs.

4. The plaintiffs further stated that after the death of deceased Mitnala

Susheela the plaintiffs intended to alienate suit schedule ‘A’ and ‘B’ properties to the third parties. But they demanded to produce the legal heirs certificate from the competent court. Having no other option, the plaintiffs filed present suit and to declare the plaintiffs are the legal heirs of deceased Mitnala Susheela.

5. The point for consideration: “Whether the plaintiffs are entitled to be

declared as legal heirs of deceased Mitnala Susheela or not?

6. The plaintiff no.1 by name Sathyamangal Sangeetha filed chief affidavit in lieu of her chief examination and Exs.A1 to A10 were marked. This court perused the Ex.A1 to A10 documents they are as follows:

Ex.A1 is the original copy of Death Certificate of late Mitala Susheela,

dated 23-01-2015 is proving the death of deceased.

Ex.A2 to Ex.A4 are the original Aadhar cards of plaintiff Nos.1 to 3 are proving the retationship between deceased and the plaintiffs.

Ex.A5 is the certified copy of sale deed vide document No.4921/1981, dt.4- 7-1981 in favour of deceased Mitnala Susheela.

Ex.A6 is the certified copy of sale deed vide document No.4922/1981, dt.4- 7-1981 in favour of deceased Mitnala Susheela.

OS No.90/2021

Ex.A7 is the certified copy of encumbrance certificate, dated 20-01-2021,

SRO, Hayathnagar No.2.

Ex.A8 is certified copy of encumbrance certificate, dated 23-01-2021,

SRO, Peddamberpet No.2.

Ex.A9 is the original copy of Market value certificate issued by SRO, Pedda

Amberpet, dt.16-01-2021 in respect of suit schedule property.

Ex.A10 is the original copy of Market value certificate issued by SRO,

Pedda Amberpet, dt.16-01-2021 in respect of suit schedule property.

7. Notice served to defendant no.2. Defendant no.2 reported by AGP and reported no objection and Paper publication filed for defendant no.1 and defendant no.1 called absent and no representation.

9. In the result, suit is decreed in favour of plaintiffs and hereby declaring that the plaintiffs are the absolute owners and possessors of the suit schedule ‘A’ and ‘B’ properties being the legal heirs of deceased Mitnala Susheela, who died on 23-01-2015.

Typed to dictation to the Stenographer, corrected and pronounced by me in the open Court on this the 29th day of June, 2021.

JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE,

CYBERABAD AT HAYATHNAGAR

OS No.90/2021

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

WITNESSES EXAMINED

FOR PLAINTIFFS: FOR

DEFENDANTs

PW-1:Palle Srinivas Reddy-None-

EXHIBITS MARKED

FOR PLAINTIFFS: FOR DEFENDANTs: -Nil-

Ex.A1 is the original copy of Death Certificate of late Mitala Susheela,

dated 23-01-2015 is proving the death of deceased.

Ex.A2 to Ex.A4 are the original Aadhar cards of plaintiff Nos.1 to 3 are proving the retationship between deceased and the plaintiffs.

Ex.A5 is the certified copy of sale deed vide document No.4921/1981, dt.4- 7-1981 in favour of deceased Mitnala Susheela.

Ex.A6 is the certified copy of sale deed vide document No.4922/1981, dt.4- 7-1981 in favour of deceased Mitnala Susheela.

Ex.A7 is the certified copy of encumbrance certificate, dated 20-01-2021, SRO, Hayathnagar No.2.

Ex.A8 is certified copy of encumbrance certificate, dated 23-01-2021, SRO, Peddamberpet No.2.

Ex.A9 is the original copy of Market value certificate issued by SRO, Pedda Amberpet, dt.16-01-2021 in respect of suit schedule property.

Ex.A10 is the original copy of Market value certificate issued by SRO, Pedda Amberpet, dt.16-01-2021 in respect of suit schedule property.

JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE

CYBERABAD AT HAYATHNAGAR

OS No.90/2021

DECREE IN ORIGINAL SUIT

IN THE COURT OF THE JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE

CYBERABAD AT HAYAHTNAGAR

PRESENT : SMT.M.SANDYA RANI,

JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE,

DATED THIS THE 29 TH DAY OF JUNE,2021

O.S.No.90 of 2021

Between: 1.M.Venu Gopal Rao, S/o.M.Ranga Rao, Aged: 78 years, Occ:Retired Employee, R/o.H.No.1-9-291/6/1, Vidya Nagar, Near Post Office, Hyderabad.

2.Sirisha Mitnala, D/o.M.Venu Gopal Rao, Aged: 44 years, Occ:Employee, R/o.H.No.2-2-20/K/9, Flat No.3A, Golden Towers Elite-1, D.D.Colony, Amberpet, Hyderabad.

3.Sathyamangal Sangeeta, D/o.M.Venu Gopal Rao, Aged: 42 years, Occupation:Employee, R/o.H.No.2-2-18/20/6, Flat No.301, Goutham Residency, D.D.Colony, Hyderabad. ….Plaintiffs

AND

1.All concerned.

2. The Tahsildar, Abdullapurmet Mandal, R.R.District. ….Defendants

CLAIM: Suit for declaration filed by plaintiffs and declaring that they are the absolute owners and possessors of suit schedule ‘A” and ‘B’ properties being the legal heirs of deceased Mitnala Susheela, who died on 23-01-2015.

CAUSE OF ACTION: The cause of action on 23-01-2015 when late Palle Sathi Reddy and when the defendant no.2 denied the legal status of the plaintiffs.

VALUATION: The suit is valued as per the market value of suit schedule ‘A’ property is valued at Rs.3,37,600/- and half of the market value comes to Rs.1,68,800/- and a Court fee of Rs.4,126/- and market value of suit schedule ‘B’ property is valued at Rs.3,19,200/- and half of the market value comes to 6

OS No.90/2021

Rs.1,59,600/- and a Court fee of Rs.4,026/-, total court fee of Rs.8,152/- is paid under section 24(b) of APCF ans SV Act, which is sufficient.

Suit presented on: 12-02-2021

Suit numbered on: 12-02-2021

This suit is coming before me on 11-06-2021 for final hearing in the presence of Sri K.Srinivas Reddy, Advocate for plaintiffs and defendant no.2 reported by AGP and reported no objection and paper publication filed for defendant no.1 and defendant no.1 called absent and no representation and stood over for consideration, this court doth the decree as follows:

1.That the suit of the plaintiffs be and the same is hereby decreed in favour of plaintiffs and hereby declaring that the absolute owners and possessors of the suit schedule ‘A’ and ‘B’ properties being the legal heirs of deceasedMitnala Susheela, who died on 23-01-2015.

2.That there is no order as to costs.

Given under my hand and seal on this the 29th day of June, 2021.

JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE

CYBERABAD AT HAYATHNAGAR

MEMO OF COSTS

FOR PLAINTIFFs FOR DEFENDANTs

1. Stamp on plaintRs. 8152-00

2. Stamp on VakalathRs. 152-00 Defendants are

3. Stamp on ExhibitsRs.Called absent

4. Stamp on processRs. 110-00

5. Publication ChargesRs.

6. Advocate fees Sr.Rs.

7. Advocate fees. Jr.Rs.

8. Misc/preparation chargesRs. TotalRs. 8,374-00

JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE

CYBERABAD AT HAYATHNAGAR

SUIT SCHEDULE ‘A” PROPERTY

All that the open land bearing Plot No.124, in Sy.No.376, 394, 397, 398 and 399, admeasuring 422 sq.yards, situated at Sree Pada Nagar, Pasumamula Village, Hayathnagar Revenue Mandal, now Abdullapurmet Mandal, Ranga Reddy District and bounded by :

North:40’ wide road South:Plot No.123 East :25’ wide road West:Plot No.125

SUIT SCHEDULE ‘B” PROPERTY

All that the open land bearing Plot No.125, in Sy.No.376, 394, 397, 398 and 399, admeasuring 399 sq.yards, situated at Sree Pada Nagar, Pasumamula 7

OS No.90/2021

Village, Hayathnagar Revenue Mandal, now Abdullapurmet Mandal, Ranga Reddy District and bounded by : North:40’ wide road South:Plot No.126 East :Plot No.124 West:25’ wide road

JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE

CYBERABAD AT HAYATHNAGAR

OS/53/2021

Jorka Vijaya vs The Tahashildar

01 Jul 2021

OS No.53/2021

IN THE COURT OF THE JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE

CYBERABAD AT HAYAHTNAGAR

PRESENT : SMT.M.SANDYA RANI,

JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE,

DATED THIS THE 1 ST DAY OF JULY,2021

O.S.No.53 of 2021

Between:

1.jorka Vijaya W/o.Late Jorkaa Sudhakar, Aged about 32 years, Occ:Housewife, 2.Jorka Deekshitha, D/o.Late Jorkaa Sudhakar, Aged about 10 years, Occ:Student, 3.Jorka Cherishya, D/o.Late Jorkaa Sudhakar, Aged about 5 years, Occ:Nil,

All are R/o.H.No.4-7, Kuntloor, Hayathnagar, Ranga Reddy District, Presently R/o.4-7 Majidpur, Anajpur, Ranga Reddy District.

(Plaintiffs Nos.2, 3 are minor in this case the plaintiff No.1 is representing as a Natural Guardian to plaintiff Nos.2,3) ….Plaintiffs

AND

1.The Tahsildar, Abdullapurmet Mandal, R.R.District.

2.All concerned. ….Defendants

This suit is coming before me on 28-06-2021 for final hearing in the presence of Sri G.Mahatma, Advocate for plaintiffs and defendant no.1 reported by AGP and reported no objection and paper publication filed for defendant no.2 and defendant no.2 called absent and no representation and having heard and stood over for consideration, this Court made the following:

J U D G M E N T

1. This is a suit for declaration to declare that the plaintiffs are the absolute owners and possessors of half share of the suit schedule property being the legal heirs of deceased J.Sudhakar, who died on 20-06-2016.

2. The brief facts of plaintiffs as mentioned in the plaint is that plaintiff no.1 is the wife and plaintiff No.2 and 3 are the children of deceased 2

OS No.53/2021

J.Sudhakar, who died on 20-06-2016, leaving behind the plaintiffs as his legal heirs and successors of his entire state and except the plaintiffs there are no other legal heirs of deceased J.Sudhakar.

3. The plaintiffs further submitted that during the life time, the deceased

J.Sudhakar purchased suit schedule property through a registered sale deed bearing document No.4327/2015, dated 07-07-2015. Since the date of purchase, the deceased J.Sudhakar has been in peaceful possession and enjoyment of the said property. After the demise of deceased J.Sudhakar plaintiffs were enjoying the suit schedule property in the capacity of legal heirs.

4. The plaintiffs further stated that after the death of deceased J.Sudhakar the plaintiffs intended to alienate suit schedule property to the third parties. But they demanded to produce the legal heirs certificate from the competent court. Having no other option, the plaintiffs filed present suit and to declare the plaintiffs are the legal heirs of deceased J.Sudhakar.

5. The point for consideration: “Whether the plaintiffs are entitled to be declared as legal heirs of deceased J.Sudhakar or not?

6. The plaintiff no.1 by name Jorka Vijaya filed chief affidavit in lieu of her chief examination and Exs.A1 to A7 were marked. This court perused the

Ex.A1 to A7 documents they are as follows:

Ex.A1 is the certified copy of link document bearing No.6585/1989, dated 27-4-1989.

Ex.A2 is the certified copy of registered G.P.A.No.4244/2015, dated 2-7- 2015.

Ex.A3 is the certified copy of registered sale deed document bearing

No.4327/2015, dated 7-7-2016 in favour of deceased J.Sudhakar.

Ex.A4 is the original death certificate of late J.Sudhakar, who died on 20- 06-2016 is proving the death of deceased.

OS No.53/2021

Ex.A5 is the original market value certificate of suit schedule property,

dated 25-01-2021, SRO, Hayathnagar with respect of suit schedule

property.

Ex.A6 is the copy of aadhar cards of plaintiff Nos.1 to 3 is proving the relationship between the deceased and the plaintiffs.

Ex.A7 is the certified copy of encumbrance certificate, dated 25-01-2021,

SRO, Hayathngar in respect of suit schedule property.

7. Notice served to defendant no.1. Defendant no.1 reported by AGP and reported no objection and Paper publication filed for defendant no.2 and defendant no.2 called absent and no representation.

9. In the result, suit is decreed in favour of plaintiffs and hereby declaring that the plaintiffs are the absolute owners and possessors of suit schedule property being the legal heirs of deceased J.Sudhakar, who died on 20-06-2016.

Typed to dictation to the Stenographer, corrected and pronounced by me in the open Court on this the 1st day of July, 2021.

JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE,

CYBERABAD AT HAYATHNAGAR

OS No.53/2021

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

WITNESSES EXAMINED

FOR PLAINTIFFS: FOR DEFENDANTs

PW-1:Jorka Vijaya-None-

EXHIBITS MARKED

FOR PLAINTIFFS: FOR DEFENDANTs: -Nil-

Ex.A1 is the certified copy of link document bearing No.6585/1989, dated 27-4-1989.

Ex.A2 is the certified copy of registered G.P.A.No.4244/2015, dated 2-7- 2015.

Ex.A3 is the certified copy of registered sale deed document bearing

No.4327/2015, dated 7-7-2016 in favour of deceased J.Sudhakar.

Ex.A4 is the original death certificate of late J.Sudhakar, who died on 20- 06-2016 is proving the death of deceased.

Ex.A5 is the original market value certificate of suit schedule property,

dated 25-01-2021, SRO, Hayathnagar with respect of suit schedule

property.

Ex.A6 is the copy of aadhar cards of plaintiff Nos.1 to 3 is proving the relationship between the deceased and the plaintiffs.

Ex.A7 is the certified copy of encumbrance certificate, dated 25-01-2021,

SRO, Hayathngar in respect of suit schedule property.

JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE

CYBERABAD AT HAYATHNAGAR

OS No.53/2021

DECREE IN ORIGINAL SUIT

IN THE COURT OF THE JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE

CYBERABAD AT HAYAHTNAGAR

PRESENT : SMT.M.SANDYA RANI,

JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE,

DATED THIS THE 1 ST DAY OF JULY,2021

O.S.No.53 of 2021

Between:

All are R/o.H.No.4-7, Kuntloor, Hayathnagar, Ranga Reddy District, Presently R/o.4-7 Majidpur, Anajpur, Ranga Reddy District.

(Plaintiffs Nos.2, 3 are minor in this case the plaintiff No.1 is representing as a Natural Guardian to plaintiff Nos.2,3) ….Plaintiffs

AND

1.The Tahsildar, Abdullapurmet Mandal, R.R.District.

2.All concerned. ….Defendants

CLAIM: Suit for declaration filed by plaintiffs and declaring that they are the absolute owners and possessors of half share of suit schedule property being the legal heirs of deceasedJ.Sudhakar, who died on 20-06-2016.

CAUSE OF ACTION: The cause of action on 20-06-2016 when late J.Sudhakar died when the defendant no.1 denied the legal status of the plaintiffs.

VALUATION: The suit is valued as per the market value of suit schedule property is valued at Rs.1,20,000/- and half of the market value comes to Rs.60,000/- and a Court fee of Rs.2626/- is paid under section 24(b) of APCF ans SV Act, which is sufficient.

Suit presented on: 29-11-2021 Suit numbered on: 29-11-2021 6

OS No.53/2021

This suit is coming before me 28-06-2021 for final hearing in the presence of Sri G.Mahatma, Advocate for plaintiffs and defendant no.1 reported by AGP and reported no objection and paper publication filed for defendant no.2 and defendant no.2 called absent and no representation and stood over for consideration, this court doth the decree as follows:

1.That the suit of the plaintiffs be and the same is hereby decreed in favour of plaintiffs and hereby declaring that the absolute owners and possessors of half share of suit schedule property being the the legal heirs of deceased J.Sudhakar, who died on 20-06-2016..

2.That there is no order as to costs.

Given under my hand and seal on this the 1st day of July, 2021.

JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE

CYBERABAD AT HAYATHNAGAR

MEMO OF COSTS

FOR PLAINTIFFs FOR DEFENDANTs

1. Stamp on plaintRs. 2626-00

2. Stamp on VakalathRs. 152-00 Defendants are

3. Stamp on ExhibitsRs.Called absent

4. Stamp on processRs. 70-00

5. Publication ChargesRs.

6. Advocate fees Sr.Rs.

7. Advocate fees. Jr.Rs.

8. Misc/preparation chargesRs. TotalRs. 2,848-00

JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE

CYBERABAD AT HAYATHNAGAR

SUIT SCHEDULE PROPERTY

All that the property i.e. Plot bearing No.108, admeasuring 100 sq.yards or 83.61 sq.meters, in Survey Nos.241, situated at Kuntloor Village, Hayathnagar

Revenue Mandal, R.R.District and bounded by :-

North:Part of Plot No.108

South:Plot No.107

East :Neighbours land

West:20 ft wide road

JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE

CYBERABAD AT HAYATHNAGAR

OS/129/2021

Smt. S.Sumathi vs The Tahsildar

29 Jun 2021

OS No.129/2021

IN THE COURT OF THE JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE

CYBERABAD AT HAYAHTNAGAR

PRESENT : SMT.M.SANDYA RANI,

JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE,

DATED THIS THE 29 TH DAY OF JUNE,2021

O.S.No.129 of 2021

Between:

1.Smt.S.Sumathi, W/o.Late S.Shankar Rao Mohite, Aged about 65 years, Occ:Housewife, 2.S.Yogitha, D/o.Late S.Shankar Rao Mohite, Aged about 40 years, Occ:Private Employee,

Both are R/o.Plot No.43, SGR Township, Ragannaguda, Thurkayamjal Village, Abdullapurmet Mandal, Ranga Reddy District, Telengana State. ….Plaintiffs

AND

1. The Tahsildar, Abdullapurmet Mandal, Ranga Reddy District. At Abdullapurmet.

2.All concerned. ….Defendants

This suit is coming before me on 22-06-2021 for final hearing in the presence of Sri Arekanti Srinivas, Advocate for plaintiffs and defendant no.1 reported by AGP and reported no objection and paper publication filed for defendant no.2 and defendant no.2 called absent and no representation and having heard and stood over for consideration, this Court made the following:

J U D G M E N T

1. This is a suit for declaration to declare that the plaintiffs are the absolute owners and possessors of the suit schedule property being the legal heirs of deceased S.Shankar Rao Mohite, S/o.Sadashiva Rao Mohite, who died on 26-01-2015.

2. The brief facts of plaintiffs as mentioned in the plaint is that plaintiff no.1 is the wife and plaintiff No.2 is the children of deceased S.Shankar Rao

Mohite, S/o.Sadashiva Rao Mohite, who died on 26-01-2015, leaving behind the plaintiffs as his legal heirs and successors of his entire state 2

OS No.129/2021

and except the plaintiffs there are no other legal heirs of deceased

S.Shankar Rao Mohite, S/o.Sadashiva Rao Mohite.

3. The plaintiffs further submitted that during the life time, the deceased

S.Shankar Rao Mohite, S/o.Sadashiva Rao Mohite purchased suit schedule property through a registered sale deed bearing document No.9022/2002,

dated 30-12-2006. Since the date of purchase, the deceased S.Shankar

Rao Mohite, S/o.Sadashiva Rao Mohite has been in peaceful possession and enjoyment of the said property. After the demise of deceased

S.Shankar Rao Mohite, S/o.Sadashiva Rao Mohite the plaintiffs were enjoying the suit schedule property in the capacity of legal heirs.

4. The plaintiffs further stated that after the death of deceased S.Shankar

Rao Mohite, S/o.Sadashiva Rao Mohite intended to alienate suit schedule property to the third parties. But they demanded to produce the legal heirs certificate from the competent court. Having no other option, the plaintiffs filed present suit and to declare the plaintiffs are the legal heirs of deceased S.Shankar Rao Mohite, S/o.Sadashiva Rao Mohite.

5. The point for consideration: “Whether the plaintiffs are entitled to be declared as legal heirs of deceased S.Shankar Rao Mohite, S/o.Sadashiva Rao Mohite or not?

6. The plaintiff no. 1 by name Smt.S.Sumathi filed chief affidavit in lieu of her chief examination and Exs.A1 to A7 were marked. This court perused the

Ex.A1 to A7 documents they are as follows:

Ex.A1 is the certified copy of sale deed bearing document No.9022/2002,

dated 30-11-2002 in favour of deceased S.Shankar Rao Mohite,

S/o.Sadashiva Rao Mohite.

Ex.A2 is the death certificate of S.Shanker Rao Mohite, dt.23-02-2015 is proving the death of deceased.

Ex.A3 is the original aadhar card of deceased 3

OS No.129/2021

Ex.A4 and Ex.A5 is the original aadhar cards of plaintiff Nos.1 and 2 are proving the relationship between the deceased and the plaintiffs.

Ex.A6 is the encumbrance certificate, dated 15-2-2021, SRO, Hayathnagar in respect of suit schedule property.

Ex.A7 is the market value certificate, dated 19-02-2021, SRO,

Vanastalipuram with regard to the suit schedule property.

7. Notice served to defendant no.1. Defendant no.1 reported by AGP and reported no objection and Paper publication filed for defendant no.2 and defendant no.2 called absent and no representation.

Mohite. Accordingly, the point is answered in favour of plaintiffs as against the defendants.

Rao Mohite, S/o.Sadashiva Rao Mohite, who died on 26-01-2015.

Typed to dictation to the Stenographer, corrected and pronounced by me in the open Court on this the 29th day of June, 2021.

JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE,

CYBERABAD AT HAYATHNAGAR

OS No.129/2021

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

WITNESSES EXAMINED

FOR PLAINTIFFS: FOR DEFENDANTs

PW-1:S.Sumathi-None-

EXHIBITS MARKED

FOR PLAINTIFFS: FOR DEFENDANTs: -Nil-

Ex.A1 is the certified copy of sale deed bearing document No.9022/2002,

dated 30-11-2002 in favour of deceased S.Shankar Rao Mohite,

S/o.Sadashiva Rao Mohite.

Ex.A2 is the death certificate of S.Shanker Rao Mohite, dt.23-02-2015 is proving the death of deceased.

Ex.A3 is the original aadhar card of deceased

Ex.A4 and Ex.A5 is the original aadhar cards of plaintiff Nos.1 and 2 are proving the relationship between the deceased and the plaintiffs.

Ex.A6 is the encumbrance certificate, dated 15-2-2021, SRO, Hayathnagar in respect of suit schedule property.

Ex.A7 is the market value certificate, dated 19-02-2021, SRO,

Vanastalipuram with regard to the suit schedule property.

JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE

CYBERABAD AT HAYATHNAGAR

OS No.129/2021

DECREE IN ORIGINAL SUIT

IN THE COURT OF THE JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE

CYBERABAD AT HAYAHTNAGAR

PRESENT : SMT.M.SANDYA RANI,

JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE,

DATED THIS THE 29 TH DAY OF JUNE,2021

O.S.No.129 of 2021

Between:

1.Smt.S.Sumathi, W/o.Late S.Shankar Rao Mohite, Aged about 65 years, Occ:Housewife, 2.S.Yogitha, D/o.Late S.Shankar Rao Mohite, Aged about 40 years, Occ:Private Employee,

Both are R/o.Plot No.43, SGR Township, Ragannaguda, Thurkayamjal Village, Abdullapurmet Mandal, Ranga Reddy District, Telengana State. ….Plaintiffs

AND

1. The Tahsildar, Abdullapurmet Mandal, Ranga Reddy District. At Abdullapurmet.

2.All concerned. ….Defendants

CLAIM: Suit for declaration filed by plaintiffs and declaring that they are the absolute owners and possessors of suit schedule property being the legal heirs of deceasedS.Shankar Rao Mohite, S/o.Sadashiva Rao Mohite, who died on 26-01-2015.

CAUSE OF ACTION: The cause of action on 26-01-2015 when late S.Shankar Rao Mohite died when the defendant no.1 denied the legal status of the plaintiffs.

VALUATION: The suit is valued as per the market value of suit schedule property is valued at Rs.12,41,000/- and half of the market value comes to Rs.2,50,000/- and a Court fee of Rs.6526/- is paid under section 24(b) of APCF ans SV Act, which is sufficient.

Suit presented on: 16-02-2021 Suit numbered on: 26-02-2021

This suit is coming before me on 22-06-2021 for final hearing in the presence of Sri Arekanti Srinivas, Advocate for plaintiffs and defendant no.1 reported by AGP and reported no objection and paper publication filed for defendant no.2 and defendant no.2 called absent and no representation and stood over for consideration, this court doth the decree as follows:

OS No.129/2021

1.That the suit of the plaintiffs be and the same is hereby decreed in favour of plaintiffs and hereby declaring that the absolute owners and possessors of suit schedule property being the legal heirs of deceased S.Shankar Rao Mohite, S/o.Sadashiva Rao Mohite, who died on 26-01-2015.

2.That there is no order as to costs.

Given under my hand and seal on this the 29th day of June, 2021.

JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE

CYBERABAD AT HAYATHNAGAR

MEMO OF COSTS

FOR PLAINTIFFs FOR DEFENDANTs

1. Stamp on plaintRs. 6526-00

2. Stamp on VakalathRs. 152-00 Defendants are

3. Stamp on ExhibitsRs.Called absent

4. Stamp on processRs. 110-00

5. Publication ChargesRs.

6. Advocate fees Sr.Rs.

7. Advocate fees. Jr.Rs.

8. Misc/preparation chargesRs. TotalRs. 6,788-00

JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE

CYBERABAD AT HAYATHNAGAR

SUIT SCHEDULE PROPERTY

All that piece and parcel of land bearing Plot No.42, admeasuring 250 sq.yards or 209.02 sq.meters, in Sy.Nos.294 and 288, SGR Township, situated at

Thurkayamjal Village, Abdullapurmet (Previously Hayathnagar) Mandal, Ranga

Reddy District, Telengana State and bounded by :

North:40’ wide road

South:Plot No.42

East :30’ wide road

West:Plot No.31

JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE

CYBERABAD AT HAYATHNAGAR

OS/176/2021

Smt.Palle Sarojana vs The Tahsildar, Hayathnagar

28 Jun 2021

OS No.176/2021

IN THE COURT OF THE JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE

CYBERABAD AT HAYAHTNAGAR

PRESENT : SMT.M.SANDYA RANI,

JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE,

DATED THIS THE 29 TH DAY OF JUNE,2021

O.S.No.176 of 2021

Between:

1.Smt.Palle Sarojana, W/o.Late Palle Sathi Reddy, Aged about 64 years, Occ:Household, 2.Palle Venkat Reddy, S/o.Late Palle Sathi Reddy, Aged about 44 years, occ:Business, 3.Palle Srinivas Reddy, S/o.Late Palle Sathi Reddy, Aged about 43 years, Occ:Business, All are R/o.Plot No.35, Pragathi Nagar, Near : St.Joseph School, Hayathnagar Village and Mandal, Ranga Reddy District.

4.Donuru Aruna, W/o.Hanmantha Reddy, D/o.Late Palle Sathi Reddy, aged about 37 years, Occ:Housewife, R/o.4-8-300/40, Shubodaya Nagar, Near :Mother Dairy, Kuntloor Village, Hayathnagar Mandal, Ranga Reddy District. ….Plaintiffs

AND

1. The Tahsildar, Hayathnagar Mandal, Ranga Reddy District.

2.All concerned. ….Defendants

This suit is coming before me on 18-06-2021 for final hearing in the presence of Sri M.Shankaraiah,Advocate for plaintiffs and defendant no.1 reported by AGP and reported no objection and paper publication filed for defendant no.2 and defendant no.2 called absent and no representation and having heard and stood over for consideration, this Court made the following:

J U D G M E N T

1. This is a suit for declaration to declare that the plaintiffs are the absolute owners and possessors of the suit schedule property being the legal heirs of deceased Palle Sathi Reddy, S/o.Late Palle Krishna Reddy, who died on 7-12-2015.

OS No.176/2021

2. The brief facts of plaintiffs as mentioned in the plaint is that plaintiff no.1 is the wife and plaintiff No.2 to 4 are the children of deceased Palle Sathi

Reddy, who died on 07-12-2015, leaving behind the plaintiffs as his legal heirs and successors of his entire state and except the plaintiffs there are no other legal heirs of deceased Palle Sathi Reddy.

3. The plaintiffs further submitted that during the life time, the deceased

Palle Sathi Reddy purchased suit schedule property through a registered sale deed bearing document No.6728/2003, dated 9-6-2003. Since the date of purchase, the deceased Palle Sathi Reddy has been in peaceful possession and enjoyment of the said property. After the demise of deceased Palle Sathi Reddy plaintiffs were enjoying the suit schedule property in the capacity of legal heirs.

4. The plaintiffs further stated that after the death of deceased Palle Sathi

Reddy.

5. The point for consideration: “Whether the plaintiffs are entitled to be

declared as legal heirs of deceased Palle Sathi Reddy or not?

6. The plaintiff no.3 by name Palle Srinivas Reddy filed chief affidavit in lieu of his chief examination and Exs.A1 to A8 were marked. This court perused the Ex.A1 to A8 documents they are as follows:

Ex.A1 is the certified copy of sale deed bearing document No.6728/2003,

dated 09-06-2003 in favour of deceased Palle Sathi Reddy.

Ex.A2 is the original death certificate of deceased Palle Sathi Reddy, dated 2-4-2016 is proving the death of deceased Palle Sathi Reddy.

OS No.176/2021

Ex.A3 to Ex.A6 are aadhar cards of plaintiff Nos.1 to 4 are proving the relationship between the deceased and the plaintiffs.

Ex.A7 is the encumbrance certificate, dated 23-02-2021 SRO, Hayathnagar in respect of suit schedule property.

Ex.A8 is the market value certificate, dated 23-02-2021 with regard to the suit schedule property.

7. Notice served to defendant no.1. Defendant no.1 reported by AGP and reported no objection and Paper publication filed for defendant no.2 and defendant no.2 called absent and no representation.

9. In the result, suit is decreed in favour of plaintiffs and hereby declaring that the plaintiffs are the absolute owners and possessors of the suit schedule property being the legal heirs of deceased Palle

Sathi Reddy, who died on 07-12-2015.

Typed to dictation to the Stenographer, corrected and pronounced by me in the open Court on this the 29th day of June, 2021.

JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE,

CYBERABAD AT HAYATHNAGAR

OS No.176/2021

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

WITNESSES EXAMINED

FOR PLAINTIFFS: FOR

DEFENDANTs

PW-1:Palle Srinivas Reddy-None-

EXHIBITS MARKED

FOR PLAINTIFFS: FOR DEFENDANTs: -Nil-

Ex.A1 is the certified copy of sale deed bearing document No.6728/2003,

dated 09-06-2003

Ex.A2 is the original death certificate of deceased Palle Sathi Reddy, dated 2-4-2016

Ex.A3 to Ex.A6 are aadhar cards of plaintiff Nos.1 to 4

Ex.A7 is the encumbrance certificate, dated 23-02-2021 SRO, Hayathnagar

Ex.A8 is the market value certificate, dated 23-02-2021

JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE

CYBERABAD AT HAYATHNAGAR

OS No.176/2021

DECREE IN ORIGINAL SUIT

IN THE COURT OF THE JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE

CYBERABAD AT HAYAHTNAGAR

PRESENT : SMT.M.SANDYA RANI,

JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE,

DATED THIS THE 29 TH DAY OF JUNE,2021

O.S.No.176 of 2021

Between:

AND

1. The Tahsildar, Hayathnagar Mandal, Ranga Reddy District.

2.All concerned. ….Defendants

CLAIM: Suit for declaration filed by plaintiffs and declaring that they are the absolute owners and possessors of suit schedule property being the legal heirs of deceasedPalle Sathi Reddy, who died on 07-12-2015.

CAUSE OF ACTION: The cause of action on 07-12-2015 when late Palle Sathi Reddy and when the defendant no.1 denied the legal status of the plaintiffs.

VALUATION: The suit is valued as per the market value of suit schedule property is valued at Rs.5,34,000/- and half of the market value comes to Rs.2,67,000/- and a Court fee of Rs.5126/- is paid under section 24(b) of APCF ans SV Act, which is sufficient.

Suit presented on: 08-03-2021 6

OS No.176/2021

Suit numbered on: 08-03-2021

This suit is coming before me on 18-06-2021 for final hearing in the presence of Sri M.Shankaraiah,Advocate for plaintiffs and defendant no.1 reported by AGP and reported no objection and paper publication filed for defendant no.2 and defendant no.2 called absent and no representation and stood over for consideration, this court doth the decree as follows:

1.That the suit of the plaintiffs be and the same is hereby decreed in favour of plaintiffs and hereby declaring that the absolute owners and possessors of the suit schedule property being the legal heirs of deceasedPalle Sathi Reddy, who died on 07-12-2015.

2.That there is no order as to costs.

Given under my hand and seal on this the 29th day of June, 2021.

JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE

CYBERABAD AT HAYATHNAGAR

MEMO OF COSTS

FOR PLAINTIFFs FOR DEFENDANTs

1. Stamp on plaintRs. 5126-00

2. Stamp on VakalathRs. 152-00 Defendants are

3. Stamp on ExhibitsRs.Called absent

4. Stamp on processRs. 110-00

5. Publication ChargesRs.

6. Advocate fees Sr.Rs.

7. Advocate fees. Jr.Rs.

8. Misc/preparation chargesRs. TotalRs. 5,388-00

JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE

CYBERABAD AT HAYATHNAGAR

SUIT SCHEDULE PROPERTY

All that piece and parcel of land bearing Plot No.35, (Northern Part) admeasuring 133.5 sq.yards, (out of 267 sq.yards) in Survey No.181, situated at

Bagh Hayathnagar Village, Hayathnagar Mandal, Ranga Reddy District,

Telengana State and bounded by :

North:Plot No.34

South:Plot No.35 (Southern Part)

East :25’ wide road

West:Plot No.42

JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE

CYBERABAD AT HAYATHNAGAR

Order Record 373 total

Case No.	Parties	Date	Type	Outcome
OS/53/2021	Jorka Vijaya vs The Tahashildar	01 Jul 2021	Judgement	—
OS/129/2021	Smt. S.Sumathi vs The Tahsildar	29 Jun 2021	Judgement	—
OS/68/2021	Smt.K.Vakula Alias Kareddy Mamatha vs Tahsildar Tahsildar Office	28 Jun 2021	Judgement	—
OS/90/2021	M.Venu Gopal Rao vs All Concerned	28 Jun 2021	Judgement	—
OS/176/2021	Smt.Palle Sarojana vs The Tahsildar, Hayathnagar	28 Jun 2021	Judgement	—
OS/482/2020	Devarakonda Lakshmi Narayana vs The Tahasildar, Hayathnagar	28 Jun 2021	Judgement	—
OS/579/2020	B. Sreerama Murthy vs Chetti Gopal	28 Jun 2021	Judgement	—
OS/601/2020	Baikani Mangamma vs Ch Bala Mallaiah	28 Jun 2021	Judgement	—
OS/117/2021	Meda Srinivasulu vs The Tahsildar, Hayathnagar	24 Jun 2021	Judgement	—
OS/188/2021	Thannikati Damodar vs The Tahsildar	22 Jun 2021	Judgement	—
OS/257/2020	Mohd Zahera Banu vs The Tahasildar and all concerned	22 Jun 2021	Judgement	—
OS/409/2020	Yenagandhula Gangaram vs All Concerned	18 Jun 2021	Judgement	—
OS/577/2020	Jyothi Dixit vs The Tahsildar, Hayathnagar	17 Jun 2021	Judgement	—
OS/38/2021	Smt.K.Nirmala vs J. Krishna Reddy	16 Jun 2021	Judgement	—
OS/49/2021	Sampally Rajeshwar Rao vs Namoju Ratna Chary	11 Jun 2021	Judgement	—
OS/431/2020	Javvadi Savithri vs The Tashildar	11 Jun 2021	Judgement	—
OS/27/2021	Orsu Ramulamma vs Tahsildar, Hayath Nagar	08 Jun 2021	Judgement	—
OS/342/2020	A. Praveen Kumar vs All concerned	08 Jun 2021	Judgement	—
OS/42/2021	Smt.Akther Unnisa Begum vs Katapally Srikanth Reddy	07 Jun 2021	Judgement	—
OS/94/2021	Chappidi vs Nalla Bal Reddy	07 Jun 2021	Judgement	—
OS/183/2020	PAWAR KISHAN RAO vs ALL CONCERNED	07 Jun 2021	Judgement	—
OS/501/2020	Erra Saraswathi vs M.Anji Reddy	07 Jun 2021	Judgement	—
OS/55/2020	HIMANSHU SINGHANIA vs ALL CONCERNED	04 Jun 2021	Judgement	—
OS/346/2020	Malgula Ramesh vs Ugadi Swamy	04 Jun 2021	Judgement	—
OS/491/2019	MATHRY SHAMALA vs SOMA LAXMAN	04 Jun 2021	Judgement	—
OS/121/2020	M.MAHESH KUMAR YADAV vs THATICHETTU RAMESH	03 Jun 2021	Judgement	—
OS/138/2020	BOORUGUPALLY BHARATHAMMA vs THE TAHSILDAR, ABDULLAPURMET	03 Jun 2021	Judgement	—
OS/555/2020	Sangisetty Jayamma vs Tahsildar, Hayathnagar	03 Jun 2021	Judgement	—
OS/315/2019	G.V. PRASAD vs L. PRABHAKAR	09 Apr 2021	Judgement	—
OS/432/2020	Kata Vasantha vs The Tahsildar, Abdullapurmet	08 Apr 2021	Judgement	—
OS/440/2020	Sow Shilpa Kherdekar vs Y.Venkat Reddy	08 Apr 2021	Judgement	—
OS/66/2021	Smt. Mallavarpu Venkata Subba Lakshmi vs Enugula Muthyam Reddy	06 Apr 2021	Judgement	—
OS/96/2015	Kalloori Malla Reddy vs Smt Salla Sukanya	31 Mar 2021	Judgement	—
OS/9/2015	G. Sureshwar Reddy vs Bikshapathi Mudiraj	30 Mar 2021	Judgement	—
CC/646/2017	State through PS Hayathnagar vs Voora Gurumurthi	30 Mar 2021	Order	—
OS/75/2014	S. Ramchandra Reddy vs V. Gandaiah @ Gandi Reddy	25 Mar 2021	Judgement	—
OS/393/2019	AMENA BANU vs THE TAHASILDHAR	25 Mar 2021	Judgement	—
OS/155/2020	R.SHAKUNTHALA vs MUNUKUNTLA NARSIMHA	23 Feb 2021	Judgement	—
OS/156/2020	BANDELA VIJAYALAXMI vs B.JANGAIAH	23 Feb 2021	Judgement	—
OS/231/2020	Fareena Begum vs The Thasildar	23 Feb 2021	Judgement	—
OS/252/2020	B.Rakesh Bharadwaj vs All concerned	23 Feb 2021	Judgement	—
OS/420/2020	Dangeti Janaki vs All Concerned	23 Feb 2021	Judgement	—
OS/422/2020	Bandi Nagaratnam vs Tahsildar, Abdullapurmet	23 Feb 2021	Judgement	—
OS/372/2020	Smt.Jetta Anuradha vs Smt.Jetta Jashwanth	05 Feb 2021	Judgement	—
OS/442/2019	Narishetty Balaraju vs The Tahsildar	05 Feb 2021	Judgement	—
OS/41/2020	ARUMBAKA ATCHAIAH vs MANDAL REBENUE OFFICER, ABDULAPURMET	04 Feb 2021	Judgement	—
OS/369/2020	Smt.Kavadapu Sathemma vs Tahsildar Hayathnagar Mandal	04 Feb 2021	Judgement	—
OS/53/2020	KAGULA LAXMAMMA vs THE TAHSILDAR, HAYATHNAGAR	03 Feb 2021	Judgement	—
OS/140/2020	ANUGU SAVITHRI vs VYAS MOHAN KUMAR	03 Feb 2021	Judgement	—
OS/152/2020	MACHA RADHA vs ALL CONCERNED	03 Feb 2021	Judgement	—
OS/191/2020	GURRAM BHARATHAMMA vs TAHSILDAR, ABDULLAPURMET	28 Jan 2021	Judgement	—
OS/416/2020	Durgam Balamma vs K.Satyanarayana Goud	28 Jan 2021	Judgement	—
OS/417/2020	Durgam Balamma vs Rondy Lakshmaiah	28 Jan 2021	Judgement	—
DVC/19/2017	B Sandhya vs B Saikrishna	28 Jan 2021	Order	—
OS/224/2016	B.KoteshwarRao vs Poojari Sailaja	25 Jan 2021	Judgement	—
OS/226/2016	N.Bal raj vs Poorjarin sailaja	25 Jan 2021	Judgement	—
OS/227/2016	Y.Swaroopa vs Poojari Sailaja	25 Jan 2021	Judgement	—
OS/228/2016	M.Sujatha vs Poojari Sailaja	25 Jan 2021	Judgement	—
OS/235/2016	J.Nandappa vs Sailaja	25 Jan 2021	Judgement	—
OS/517/2019	K.NARASIMHA vs THE TAHASILDAR, ABDULAPURMET	25 Jan 2021	Judgement	—
OS/236/2016	D.Sravanthi vs Poojari Sailaja	21 Jan 2021	Judgement	—
OS/237/2016	K.Sudhaker Rao vs Poojari Sailaja	21 Jan 2021	Judgement	—
OS/238/2016	Appawar Narayana Rao vs Poorjari Sailaja	21 Jan 2021	Judgement	—
OS/16/2020	PALADUGU VENKATESWARLU vs THE TAHSILDAR, ABDULAPURMET MANDAL	20 Jan 2021	Judgement	—
OS/459/2019	ITHARAJU ANJAMMA vs THE TAHSILDAR, ABDULAPURMET	20 Jan 2021	Judgement	—
OS/492/2019	SURABHI JAYA LAXMAMMA vs THE TAHASILDAR, ABDULAPURMET	18 Jan 2021	Judgement	—
OS/99/2020	RANGA SRINIVAS vs ALL CONCERNED	07 Jan 2021	Judgement	—
OS/184/2020	RONDLA NARSI REDDY vs K.ASHOK CHARY	06 Jan 2021	Judgement	—
OS/371/2020	Tippisetti Vijay vs Nathi Pradeep	06 Jan 2021	Judgement	—
OS/504/2019	Gollapalli Srirama Murthy vs The Tashsildar	06 Jan 2021	Judgement	—
OS/71/2016	L.Anand Srinivas vs P.Sailaja	04 Jan 2021	Judgement	—
OS/96/2016	SMT.C.Bhagyavathy vs Poojari Sailaja	04 Jan 2021	Judgement	—
OS/220/2016	Mulukala.Leelavathy vs Poojari Sailaja	04 Jan 2021	Judgement	—
OS/221/2016	Bejawar Sudarshan vs Poojari sailaja	04 Jan 2021	Judgement	—
OS/21/2016	B.Ranadevipaul vs P.Sailaja	30 Dec 2020	Judgement	—
OS/43/2020	KALKONDA SRIYAL vs THAHSILDHAR, ABDULAPURMET	30 Dec 2020	Judgement	—
OS/44/2020	KALKONDA SRIYAL vs THAHSILDHAR, ABDULAPURMET	30 Dec 2020	Judgement	—
OS/53/2016	M.Sudheerkumar vs Poojari Sailaja	30 Dec 2020	Judgement	—
OS/69/2020	VEMPATI VEERAMANI vs B.SRINIVAS	30 Dec 2020	Judgement	—
OS/364/2020	Smt.Vanitha Laxman Rao vs All concerned	30 Dec 2020	Judgement	—
OS/205/2020	Ganata Nagamani vs Thasildhar Abdullapurmet	29 Dec 2020	Judgement	—
OS/46/2020	SIMHADRI SATYANARAYAN PRASAD RAO vs J.KRISHNA REDDY	28 Dec 2020	Judgement	—
OS/305/2020	Narra Indira Reddy vs Tahsildar Abdullapurmet mandal	21 Dec 2020	Judgement	—
OS/335/2020	Prabhala Kalyani vs Bandari Veeresham	19 Dec 2020	Judgement	—
OS/378/2020	Chavali Venkata Subrahmanya sastry vs Challa Maschindra Reddy	19 Dec 2020	Judgement	—
OS/97/2020	S.DAMODAR vs ALL CONCERNED	16 Dec 2020	Judgement	—
OS/319/2020	Gunji Padma vs The Thasildar, Abdullapurmet	14 Dec 2020	Judgement	—
OS/91/2020	K.M.S RUKMINI vs GOPAGONI RAJU	11 Dec 2020	Judgement	—
OS/338/2020	Bakkatatla Chaitanya vs The Thasildar, Abdullapurmet	11 Dec 2020	Judgement	—
OS/348/2020	G.Sumithra vs The Thasildar, Hayathnagar	11 Dec 2020	Judgement	—
OS/58/2020	MEDARAMETLA CHINNAIAH vs ALL CONCERNED	10 Dec 2020	Judgement	—
OS/120/2020	THAVIDABOINA KRISHNA vs THE TAHSILDAR, ABDULLAPURMET	08 Dec 2020	Judgement	—
OS/25/2020	PASAPULA VENKATA NAGA SRI LAKSHMI vs BADDAM MAHENDER REDDY	04 Dec 2020	Judgement	—
OS/434/2019	J.KAMALA BAI vs THE THASILDHAR, ABDULAPURMET	25 Nov 2020	Judgement	—
OS/326/2020	Nellutla Bikshapathy vs Bandyala Vijay	17 Nov 2020	Judgement	—
OS/204/2020	R. Lakshmi Devi vs Tahsildar, Abdullapurmet	11 Nov 2020	Judgement	—
OS/252/2019	KANDLAKUNTA SREELATHA vs ALL CONCERNED	11 Sep 2020	Judgement	—
OS/431/2019	Z.Pitchaiah vs A Rama Rao	11 Sep 2020	Judgement	—
OS/481/2019	SILVANE BALAJI vs SINGARAM BHASKAR REDDY	11 Sep 2020	Judgement	—
OS/493/2019	BATTULA RAJU vs THE TAHASILDAR, ABDULAPURMET	11 Sep 2020	Judgement	—

Showing 100 of 373 orders — Log in to browse all pages.

Monthly Orders (Last 12 Months)

Jul 2021		1
Jun 2021		27
Apr 2021		4
Mar 2021		5
Feb 2021		13
Jan 2021		24
Dec 2020		19
Nov 2020		4
Sep 2020		8
Mar 2020		3
Feb 2020		23
Jan 2020		22

Frequently Asked Questions

How many cases has Smt.M.Sandhya Rani handled?

Smt.M.Sandhya Rani has handled 379 court orders since 2019 at Shadnagar, ADJ Court Complex. The average disposal rate is 9 orders per month.

What types of cases does Smt.M.Sandhya Rani hear?

Based on available records, Smt.M.Sandhya Rani primarily handles Civil matters (Original Suits, Execution Petitions) and Criminal matters (Criminal Cases, Domestic Violence Cases) at Shadnagar, ADJ Court Complex.

Where is Smt.M.Sandhya Rani currently posted?

Smt.M.Sandhya Rani is posted as Senior Civil Judge-cum-Assistant Sessions Judge at Shadnagar, ADJ Court Complex, Rangareddy, Telangana.

Are judgments by Smt.M.Sandhya Rani available online?

Yes. 5 judgments by Smt.M.Sandhya Rani are available on Legistro with full text, outcome, and sections cited.

How fast does Smt.M.Sandhya Rani dispose cases?

Smt.M.Sandhya Rani disposes approximately 9 cases per month, based on 379 orders handled over their tenure at Shadnagar, ADJ Court Complex.

Since when is Smt.M.Sandhya Rani serving?

Smt.M.Sandhya Rani has been serving at Shadnagar, ADJ Court Complex since 2019.

Case Types

OS 68%

CC 30%

DVC 1%

EP 1%

STC 1%

Posting History

May 2022 — Jun 2022

Senior Civil Judge-cum-Assistant Sessions Judge
Jan 2019 — Aug 2021

JCJ Cum XXIV Addl MM at Hayathnagar · 379 orders

Other Judges at this Court

Ms. S.swathi Reddy

Fast Track Special Judge for trial and disposal of...

2 orders

Mr. Kotha Ravi

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

113 orders

Ms. M.Sahithi

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

1 orders

K.Dasharatha Ramaiah

Senior Civil Judge-cum-IX Additional Chief Judicia...

0 orders

← View all judges at Shadnagar, ADJ Court Complex