Smt.M.Shubha Vani

1H.M.O.P. 40 of 2023, Dt:15.09.2023

IN THE COURT OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT Parchur IN THE COURT OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT Parchur

Present : Smt. M.ShubhavaniPresent : Smt. M.Shubhavani

Senior Civil Judge, Parchur Senior Civil Judge, Parchur

Friday, this the Fifteenth [15Friday, this the Fifteenth [15thth] day of September, 2023] day of September, 2023

H.M.O.P.No. 40 of 2023 H.M.O.P.No. 40 of 2023

Between: Between:

1. Muddana Sarath Chandra,,1. Muddana Sarath Chandra s/o.Ramakrishna Prasad, age 34 years, s/o.Ramakrishna Prasad, age 34 years, R/o.Thimmasamudram village, R/o.Thimmasamudram village, N.G.Padu Mandal, Prakasam District, N.G.Padu Mandal, Prakasam District, A.P., India, A.P., India,

2. Are Jahnavi, 2. Are Jahnavi, w/o.Muddana Sarath Chandra, age 25 years, w/o.Muddana Sarath Chandra, age 25 years, D/o.Are Rambabu, D/o.Are Rambabu, R/o.Hanumojipalem village, R/o.Hanumojipalem village, Inkollu Mandal, Bapatla District, Inkollu Mandal, Bapatla District,

A.P.,A.P.,

Now R/o.D.No.13-1-191/1, Borabanda,Now R/o.D.No.13-1-191/1, Borabanda,

Bala Nagar, Hyderabad. Bala Nagar, Hyderabad. ….. Petitioners ….. Petitioners

AND AND

NIL NIL … … ..Respondent ..Respondent

This petition is presented before me for Orders today i.e., onThis petition is presented before me for Orders today i.e., on 13.09.2023 in the presence of 13.09.2023 in the presence of Sri.M.Ravindranath Reddy Sri.M.Ravindranath Reddy , ,AdvocateAdvocate

for the petitioners, having heard and after perusing the material onfor the petitioners, having heard and after perusing the material on

record and having stood over for consideration till this day, this courtrecord and having stood over for consideration till this day, this court delivers the following:delivers the following:

// O R D E R // // O R D E R //

1.This is a petition filed by the petitioners under Section 13-B of

Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 seeking the relief of dissolution of marriage

dated 24-11-2016 between them, by mutual consent.

2. The brief averments of the petition are as follows:

The petitioners got married on 24-11-2016, according to Hindu rites and custom, at Sri Chennakesava Swamy vari Kalyana Mandapam,

Inkollu. Immediately after the marriage, the 2nd petitioner joined with the 1st petitioner and their marriage was consummated and they set up family at Mehidhipatnam, Hyderabad on 15-05-2017. Out of their wedlock, 2nd petitioner gave birth to two female child on 06-11-2017 and 03-11-2019 respectively. In view of the disputes between the petitioners and on the intervention of elders, they put up family at Inkollu on 05-05-2020. Even 2H.M.O.P. 40 of 2023, Dt:15.09.2023 after put up family at Inkollu, there was no bonding between them.

Subsequently, due to disputes between them, 2nd petitioner left the matrimonial home on 21-01-2021 and started to reside with her parents.

Since then, they have been residing separately. There is no chance of reconciliation between the parties or chances of resumption of normal marital relationship in future. The efforts for mediation were in vain.

While so, their parents and elders have tried their level best to settle the matter, but the petitioners 1 and 2 have not accepted for reconciliation and they have mutually agreed that their marriage should be dissolved, as such the petitioners filed the petition for dissolution of their marriage on mutual consent.

3.This Court registered the case as H.M.O.P. and posted the matter for appearance of both the parties for reconciliation.

4. Both the petitioners appeared before the Court and counseling was held which was not fructified, as both parties submitted to the Court that, there is no chance of reunion between them and they are living separately and prayed the Court to grant divorce. Hence, this Court found that, there was no possibility of reconciliation as petitioners were firm in their resolve to get divorced. Hence, cooling period of six months as required under Sec. 13-B (2) of Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 is waived, by considering the decision of the Hon’ble Apex Court in Amardeep

Singh Vs Harveen Kaur reported in AIR 2017 SC 4417 . The matter is posted for enquiry.

5. During enquiry, petitioners filed their chief-examination affidavits, in lieu of their chief-examination as PW1 & PW2 and marked

Ex. P1 and P2.

6. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners. Perused the material on record.

7. Now, the point for determination is:

Whether this petition is to be allowed by granting the decree

of divorce by mutual consent between the petitioners?

3H.M.O.P. 40 of 2023, Dt:15.09.2023

POINT:

8. As already stated above, petitioners 1 & 2 filed their chief affidavits as PW.1 & PW.2 respectively by reiterating the averments of the petition and marked Ex.P1 and P2. Ex.P1- Marriage invitation card; Ex.P2- marriage photo notarized certificate, disclose the fact of marriage between them. Thereafter their marital tie was broken which they could not reconcile. They further state that, they were living separately and as there is no chance of reunion had resolved to end their marriage by obtaining decree of divorce by mutual consent.

9.Inspite of the efforts made by this Court by calling the parties for counseling, but in vain, as the parties had submitted to the Court that, there are no chance of reunion and waiting for cooling period could only prolong their agony.

10. Under these circumstances, this Court does not find any other way except to waive the cooling period of six months and accede to the request of the petitioners for dissolving their marriage by mutual consent.

11.For the above said reasons, this Court is inclined to allow this application by granting the decree of divorce by mutual consent.

Accordingly, this point is determined.

12. In the result, this petition is allowed without costs, by dissolving12. In the result, this petition is allowed without costs, by dissolving the marriage of petitioners No.1 & 2 which was solemnized on 24-11-the marriage of petitioners No.1 & 2 which was solemnized on 24-11- 2016, by way of decree of divorce by mutual consent.2016, by way of decree of divorce by mutual consent.

Typed to my dictation, corrected and pronounced by me in OpenTyped to my dictation, corrected and pronounced by me in Open Court, this the 15Court, this the 15 th th day of September, 2023. day of September, 2023.

Sd/-M.ShubhavaniSd/-M.Shubhavani

Senior Civil Judge, Senior Civil Judge,

Parchur. Parchur.

// APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE // // APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE //

-: Witnesses Examined :- -: Witnesses Examined :-

For petitioner For petitioner For respondents For respondents

P.W.1: Muddana Sarath ChandraP.W.1: Muddana Sarath ChandraNoneNone P.W.2: Are JahnaviP.W.2: Are Jahnavi 4H.M.O.P. 40 of 2023, Dt:15.09.2023

// Documents marked // // Documents marked //

For Petitioner: For Petitioner:

Ex.P1:Marriage invitation card;Marriage invitation card; Ex.P2:Marriage photo Notarized certificate. Marriage photo Notarized certificate.

For respondent: NilFor respondent: Nil

Sd/-M.ShubhavaniSd/-M.Shubhavani

S.C.J., Parchur.S.C.J., Parchur.

5H.M.O.P. 39 of 2023, Dt:14.09.2023

IN THE COURT OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT Parchur IN THE COURT OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT Parchur

Present : Smt. M.ShubhavaniPresent : Smt. M.Shubhavani

Senior Civil Judge, Parchur Senior Civil Judge, Parchur

Friday, this the Fifteenth [15Friday, this the Fifteenth [15thth] day of September, 2023] day of September, 2023

H.M.O.P.No. 40 of 2023 H.M.O.P.No. 40 of 2023

Between: Between:

1. Muddana Sarath Chandra,,1. Muddana Sarath Chandra s/o.Ramakrishna Prasad, age 34 years, s/o.Ramakrishna Prasad, age 34 years, R/o.Thimmasamudram village, R/o.Thimmasamudram village, N.G.Padu Mandal, Prakasam District, N.G.Padu Mandal, Prakasam District, A.P., India, A.P., India,

2. Are Jahnavi, 2. Are Jahnavi, w/o.Muddana Sarath Chandra, age 25 years, w/o.Muddana Sarath Chandra, age 25 years, D/o.Are Rambabu, D/o.Are Rambabu, R/o.Hanumojipalem village, R/o.Hanumojipalem village, Inkollu Mandal, Bapatla District, Inkollu Mandal, Bapatla District,

A.P.,A.P.,

Now R/o.D.No.13-1-191/1, Borabanda,Now R/o.D.No.13-1-191/1, Borabanda,

Bala Nagar, Hyderabad. Bala Nagar, Hyderabad. ….. Petitioners ….. Petitioners

AND AND

NIL NIL … … ..Respondent ..Respondent

This is a petition filed by the petitioners under Section 13-B ofThis is a petition filed by the petitioners under Section 13-B of Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 seeking the relief of dissolution of marriageHindu Marriage Act, 1955 seeking the relief of dissolution of marriage

dated 24-11-2016dated 24-11-2016 between them, by mutual consent. between them, by mutual consent.

Petition presented on 28.08.2023 Petition filed on 04.09.2023

Cause of action: Cause of action for the petition arose on 24-11-2016, when the marriage of the petitioners was performed, during their marriage, they blessed with two female children, when they put up family at Hyderabad, when after the birth of children they shifted their residence to Inkollu, when the disputes in between them have not fruitful, on 21-01-2021 when the 2nd petitioner left the matrimonial home and since then, they have been residing separately and there are no chances of reunion when the petitioners decided to take the divorce by mutual consent, and at Inkollu where the marriage of petitioners performed and where spouse lastly resided together, within the jurisdiction of this

Hon’ble Court.

Court Fee: This being a petition filed under section 13 -B of Hindu

Marriage Act, a fixed court fee of Rs.10/- is paid under Schedule II,

Art-1 (vii) of APCF & SV Act.

6H.M.O.P. 39 of 2023, Dt:14.09.2023

This petition is presented before me for Orders today i.e., onThis petition is presented before me for Orders today i.e., on 13.09.2023 in the presence of Sri.M.Ravindranath Reddy,, Advocate for13.09.2023 in the presence of Sri.M.Ravindranath Reddy Advocate for the petitioners, having heard and after perusing the material on recordthe petitioners, having heard and after perusing the material on record and having stood over for consideration till this day, this Court dothand having stood over for consideration till this day, order and decreetal order:

(1) that the petition be and the same is hereby allowed by dissolving the marriage of petitioners No.1 & 2 which was solemnized on 24-11-2016, by way of decree of divorce by mutual consent; and (2) that each party do bear their own costs. ( CM & FC not filed by either side.)

Given under my hand and seal of the Court, this the 15 th day

of September, 2023.

Sd/-M.Shubhavani

SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE,

Parchur.

TABLE OF COSTS

(CM & FC not filed by either side)

Sd/-M.Shubhavani

S.C.J., Parchur.

1H.M.O.P. 39 of 2023, Dt:14.09.2023

IN THE COURT OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT Parchur IN THE COURT OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT Parchur

Present : Smt. M.ShubhavaniPresent : Smt. M.Shubhavani

Senior Civil Judge, Parchur Senior Civil Judge, Parchur

Thursday, this the Fourteenth [14Thursday, this the Fourteenth [14thth] day of September, 2023] day of September, 2023

H.M.O.P.No. 39 of 2023 H.M.O.P.No. 39 of 2023

Between: Between:

1. Aratikatla Komali,,1. Aratikatla Komali w/o.Venkata Krishna Rao, age 28 years, w/o.Venkata Krishna Rao, age 28 years, D/o.Dharanikota Punna Rao, D/o.Dharanikota Punna Rao, R/o.H.No.1-25/1, Gangavaram Road,R/o.H.No.1-25/1, Gangavaram Road, Inkollu, Inkollu Mandal, Inkollu, Inkollu Mandal, Bapatla District,Bapatla District,

2. Aratikatla Venkata Krishna Rao, 2. Aratikatla Venkata Krishna Rao, s/o.Ramachandra Rao, age 32 years, s/o.Ramachandra Rao, age 32 years, R/o.H.No.1-40, Nalluru village, R/o.H.No.1-40, Nalluru village, Repalle, Repalle Mandal, Bapatla District, Repalle, Repalle Mandal, Bapatla District,

….. Petitioners ….. Petitioners

AND AND

NIL NIL … … ..Respondent ..Respondent

This petition is presented before me for Orders today i.e., onThis petition is presented before me for Orders today i.e., on 12.09.2023 in the presence of 12.09.2023 in the presence of Sri.G.Bala Prasada Murthy Sri.G.Bala Prasada Murthy , ,AdvocateAdvocate

for the petitioners, having heard and after perusing the material onfor the petitioners, having heard and after perusing the material on

record and having stood over for consideration till this day, this courtrecord and having stood over for consideration till this day, this court delivers the following:delivers the following:

// O R D E R // // O R D E R //

1.This is a petition filed by the petitioners under Section 13-B of

Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 seeking the relief of dissolution of marriage

dated 24-04-2022 between them, by mutual consent.

2. The brief averments of the petition are as follows:

The petitioners got married on 24-04-2022, according to Hindu rites and custom, at Sri Venkateswara Swamy Temple, Vykuntapuram, Tenali.

Immediately after the marriage, the 1st petitioner joined with the 2nd petitioner and their marriage was consummated and they lived together only two months from the date of marriage. During their wedlock they have no issues. Subsequently, due to disputes between them, they have been residing separately. There is no chance of reconciliation between the parties or chances of resumption of normal marital relationship in future. The efforts for mediation were in vain. While so, their parents and elders have tried their level best to settle the matter, but the 2H.M.O.P. 39 of 2023, Dt:14.09.2023 petitioners 1 and 2 have not accepted for reconciliation and they have mutually agreed that their marriage should be dissolved, as such the petitioners filed the petition for dissolution of their marriage on mutual consent.

3.This Court registered the case as H.M.O.P. and posted the matter for appearance of both the parties for reconciliation.

4. Both the petitioners appeared before the Court and counseling was held which was not fructified, as both parties submitted to the Court that, there is no chance of reunion between them and they are living separately and prayed the Court to grant divorce. Hence, this Court found that, there was no possibility of reconciliation as petitioners were firm in their resolve to get divorced. Hence, cooling period of six months as required under Sec. 13-B (2) of Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 is waived, by considering the decision of the Hon’ble Apex Court in Amardeep

Singh Vs Harveen Kaur reported in AIR 2017 SC 4417 . The matter is posted for enquiry.

5. During enquiry, petitioners filed their chief-examination affidavits, in lieu of their chief-examination as PW1 & PW2 and marked

Ex. P1 and P2.

6. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners. Perused the material on record.

7. Now, the point for determination is:

Whether this petition is to be allowed by granting the decree

of divorce by mutual consent between the petitioners?

POINT:

8. As already stated above, petitioners 1 & 2 filed their chief affidavits as PW.1 & PW.2 respectively by reiterating the averments of the petition and marked Ex.P1 and P2. Ex.P1- Marriage invitation card; Ex.P2- notarized certificate, disclose the fact of marriage between them.

Thereafter their marital tie was broken which they could not reconcile.

They further state that, they were living separately and as there is no 3H.M.O.P. 39 of 2023, Dt:14.09.2023 chance of reunion had resolved to end their marriage by obtaining decree of divorce by mutual consent.

9.Inspite of the efforts made by this Court by calling the parties for counseling, but in vain, as the parties had submitted to the Court that, there are no chance of reunion and waiting for cooling period could only prolong their agony.

10. Under these circumstances, this Court does not find any other way except to waive the cooling period of six months and accede to the request of the petitioners for dissolving their marriage by mutual consent.

11.For the above said reasons, this Court is inclined to allow this application by granting the decree of divorce by mutual consent.

Accordingly, this point is determined.

12. In the result, this petition is allowed without costs, by dissolving12. In the result, this petition is allowed without costs, by dissolving the marriage of petitioners No.1 & 2 which was solemnized on 24-04-the marriage of petitioners No.1 & 2 which was solemnized on 24-04- 2022, by way of decree of divorce by mutual consent.2022, by way of decree of divorce by mutual consent.

Typed to my dictation, corrected and pronounced by me in OpenTyped to my dictation, corrected and pronounced by me in Open Court, this the 14Court, this the 14 th th day of September, 2023. day of September, 2023.

Sd/-M.Shubhavani Sd/-M.Shubhavani

Senior Civil Judge, Senior Civil Judge,

Parchur. Parchur.

// APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE // // APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE //

-: Witnesses Examined :- -: Witnesses Examined :-

For petitioner For petitioner For respondents For respondents

P.W.1: Aratikatla KomaliP.W.1: Aratikatla KomaliNoneNone P.W.2: Aratikatla Venkata Krishna RaoP.W.2: Aratikatla Venkata Krishna Rao

// Documents marked // // Documents marked //

For Petitioner: For Petitioner:

Ex.P1:Marriage invitation card;Marriage invitation card; Ex.P2:Notarized certificate. Notarized certificate.

For respondent: NilFor respondent: Nil

Sd/-M.Shubhavani Sd/-M.Shubhavani

S.C.J., Parchur.S.C.J., Parchur.

4H.M.O.P. 39 of 2023, Dt:14.09.2023

IN THE COURT OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT Parchur IN THE COURT OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT Parchur

Present : Smt. M.ShubhavaniPresent : Smt. M.Shubhavani

Senior Civil Judge, Parchur Senior Civil Judge, Parchur

Thursday, this the Fourteenth [14Thursday, this the Fourteenth [14thth] day of September, 2023] day of September, 2023

H.M.O.P.No. 39 of 2023 H.M.O.P.No. 39 of 2023

Between: Between:

1. Aratikatla Komali,,1. Aratikatla Komali w/o.Venkata Krishna Rao, age 28 years, w/o.Venkata Krishna Rao, age 28 years, D/o.Dharanikota Punna Rao, D/o.Dharanikota Punna Rao, R/o.H.No.1-25/1, Gangavaram Road,R/o.H.No.1-25/1, Gangavaram Road, Inkollu, Inkollu Mandal, Inkollu, Inkollu Mandal, Bapatla District,Bapatla District,

2. Aratikatla Venkata Krishna Rao, 2. Aratikatla Venkata Krishna Rao, s/o.Ramachandra Rao, age 32 years, s/o.Ramachandra Rao, age 32 years, R/o.H.No.1-40, Nalluru village, R/o.H.No.1-40, Nalluru village, Repalle, Repalle Mandal, Bapatla District, Repalle, Repalle Mandal, Bapatla District,

….. Petitioners ….. Petitioners

AND AND

NIL NIL … … ..Respondent ..Respondent

This is a petition filed by the petitioners under Section 13-B ofThis is a petition filed by the petitioners under Section 13-B of

Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 seeking the relief of dissolution of marriageHindu Marriage Act, 1955 seeking the relief of dissolution of marriage

dated 24-04-2022dated 24-04-2022 between them, by mutual consent. between them, by mutual consent.

Petition presented on 16.08.2023 Petition filed on 05.09.2023

Cause of action: Cause of action for the petition arose on 24.04.2022, when the marriage of the petitioners was performed, when two months after the marriage, both the petitioners separated and residing separately and there are no chances of reunion when the petitioners decided to take the divorce by mutual consent, and at Inkollu where the 1st petitioner has been residing, within the jurisdiction of this Hon’ble Court. Court Fee: This being a petition filed under section 13 -B of Hindu

Marriage Act, a fixed court fee of Rs.10/- is paid under Schedule II,

Art-1 (vii) of APCF & SV Act.

This petition is presented before me for Orders today i.e., onThis petition is presented before me for Orders today i.e., on 12.09.2023 in the presence of 12.09.2023 in the presence of Sri.G.Bala Prasada Murthy Sri.G.Bala Prasada Murthy , ,AdvocateAdvocate

for the petitioners, having heard and after perusing the material onfor the petitioners, having heard and after perusing the material on

record and having stood over for consideration till this day, this Courtrecord and having stood over for consideration till this day, doth order and decreetal order:

5H.M.O.P. 39 of 2023, Dt:14.09.2023 (1) that the petition be and the same is hereby allowed by dissolving the marriage of petitioners No.1 & 2 which was solemnized on 24-04-2022, by way of decree of divorce by mutual consent; and (2) that each party do bear their own costs. ( CM & FC not filed by either side.)

Given under my hand and seal of the Court, this the 14 th day

of September, 2023.

Sd/-M.Shubhavani

SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE,

Parchur.

TABLE OF COSTS

(CM & FC not filed by either side)

Sd/-M.Shubhavani

S.C.J., Parchur.

1 O.S. No.01 of 2022, Dt: 06.09.2023

IN THE COURT OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT PARCHUR. IN THE COURT OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT PARCHUR.

Present : Smt M.Shubhavani,Present : Smt M.Shubhavani,

Senior Civil Judge, PARCHURSenior Civil Judge, PARCHUR

Wednesday, this the 6 th Wednesday, this the 6 th day of September, 2023 day of September, 2023

Original Suit No. 01 of 2022 Original Suit No. 01 of 2022

1. Ravipudi Hanumantha Rao,1. Ravipudi Hanumantha Rao, s/o.(late) Parandhamaiah, age 90 years, s/o.(late) Parandhamaiah, age 90 years, R/o.Nakkalapalem, Inkollu Mandal,R/o.Nakkalapalem, Inkollu Mandal, Prakasam District, Prakasam District, Presently working at Padmavathi Nilayam,Presently working at Padmavathi Nilayam, D.No.9-5-21, Railpet, 4D.No.9-5-21, Railpet, 4thth lane, Guntur, lane, Guntur,

2. Ravipudi Srinivasa Rao,2. Ravipudi Srinivasa Rao, s/o.Hanumantha Rao, age 62 years, s/o.Hanumantha Rao, age 62 years, R/o.Nakkalapalem, Inkollu Mandal,R/o.Nakkalapalem, Inkollu Mandal, Prakasam District, Prakasam District, Presently working at Padmavathi Nilayam,Presently working at Padmavathi Nilayam, D.No.9-5-21, Railpet, 4D.No.9-5-21, Railpet, 4thth lane, Guntur, lane, Guntur,

3. Ravipudi Rajesh,3. Ravipudi Rajesh, s/o.Srinivasa Rao, age 35 years, s/o.Srinivasa Rao, age 35 years, R/o.Nakkalapalem, Inkollu Mandal,R/o.Nakkalapalem, Inkollu Mandal, Prakasam District, Prakasam District, Presently working at Padmavathi Nilayam,Presently working at Padmavathi Nilayam, D.No.9-5-21, Railpet, 4D.No.9-5-21, Railpet, 4thth lane, Guntur, lane, Guntur,

4. Ravipudi Sai Pradeep,4. Ravipudi Sai Pradeep, s/o.Srinivasa Rao, age 33 years, s/o.Srinivasa Rao, age 33 years, R/o.Nakkalapalem, Inkollu Mandal,R/o.Nakkalapalem, Inkollu Mandal, Prakasam District, Prakasam District, at present residing at 4302 ADKISSON LNat present residing at 4302 ADKISSON LN OWINGS MILLS MD 21117, USA, OWINGS MILLS MD 21117, USA, Rep.by his G.P.A., Ravipudi Srinivasa Rao, Rep.by his G.P.A., Ravipudi Srinivasa Rao, s/o.Hanumantha Rao – Plaintiff No.2,s/o.Hanumantha Rao – Plaintiff No.2, … .Plaintif … .Plaintif

V/s V/s

Murakonda Rajendra Prasad, Murakonda Rajendra Prasad, s/o.Bhushaiah @ Bosubabu, age 40 years, s/o.Bhushaiah @ Bosubabu, age 40 years, R/o.D.No.11-10, Parchur Road, R/o.D.No.11-10, Parchur Road, Inkollu – 523 167, Inkollu Mandal,Inkollu – 523 167, Inkollu Mandal, Prakasam District, Prakasam District, Presently residing at Sanra Organics Pvt Ltd.,Presently residing at Sanra Organics Pvt Ltd., Flat No.301, Dwllings, Sy.No.74 & 75, Flat No.301, Dwllings, Sy.No.74 & 75, Jaihind Enclave, Madhapur, Jaihind Enclave, Madhapur, Hyderabad 500 081, Telangana State. Hyderabad 500 081, Telangana State.

… ..Defendant … ..Defendant

This suit is presented before me today i.e., on 24.08.2023, forThis suit is presented before me today i.e., on 24.08.2023, for Judgment, in the presence of Sri. R. Satyanarayana, Judgment, in the presence of Sri. R. Satyanarayana, Advocate for theAdvocate for the Plaintiff and the Defendant remained exparte, having heard and afterPlaintiff and the Defendant remained exparte, having heard and after perusing the material on record and having stood over for considerationperusing the material on record and having stood over for consideration till this day, this Court delivered the following:till this day, this Court delivered the following:

2 O.S. No.01 of 2022, Dt: 06.09.2023

// J U D G M E N T // // J U D G M E N T //

01.This is a suit filed by the Plaintiff against the Defendant for recovery of Rs.39,31,792/- by directing the defendant to deposit the said amount, along with subsequent interest and costs; if the defendant fails to deposit the said amount, the plaint schedule property may by auctioned and if the said amount is not sufficient to redeem the suit amount personal decree may by passed with subsequent interest at 3% p.a., from the date of filing of suit till the date of realization.

02.The averments of the Plaint, in brief, are as follows:-

The defendant borrowed an amount of Rs.50,00,000/- (Rupees Fifty Lakhs only) from the 1st plaintiff and Ravipudi

Padmavathi for his family expenses on 09.07.2018 by executing a registered mortgage deed pertaining to the schedule property, creating charge over the plaint schedule house property towards security of the said amount, agreeing to redeem the mortgage deed debt within sixteen months i.e., on or before 08.11.2019 along with interest @ 3 % p.a.

Thereafter, the defendant made part payment of Rs.10,00,000/- on 23-12- 2019 and Rs.5,00,000/- on 18-02-2020 through RTGS in Punjab National

Bank, Station Road, Guntur in the joint account of 1st plaintiff and

Padmavathi. Subsequently, the defendant failed to pay the balance amount due and fails to redeem the suit mortgage deed, despite repeated demands.

Later, said Ravipudi Padmavathi died on 16-01-2021 leaving behind her, her husband, and two sons, as Plaintiffs 2 to 4 respectively, as her legal representatives. So, the plaintiffs 2 to 4 along with 1st plaintiff are entitled to recover the balance mortgage debt and enjoy the same with absolute rights. The 4th Plaintiff has been settled in USA., who executed

General Power of Attorney for the purpose of this case on 13-10-2021 in favour of 2nd Plaintiff and the same was certified by the Notary Public, 3 O.S. No.01 of 2022, Dt: 06.09.2023

Maryland, USA., and it was regularized by collecting necessary fees.

Hence, the suit.

03. The defendant remained exparte.

04. To substantiate the case of the Plaintiffs, the2nd Plaintiff, got examined examined as P.W.1 and the 1st Plaintiff got examined as P.W.2 and got marked Ex.A.1 is the Original Registered mortage deed dated 09- 07-2018 executed by the defendant in favour of the 1st plaintiff and

Ravipudi Padmavathi; Ex.A.2 is the Original Death certificate dated 06- 03-2021 of Ravipudi Padmavathi issued by the Guntur Municipal

Corporation; Ex.A.3 is the Certified copy of Family member certificate

dated 24-08-2021 of Ravipudi Padmavathi issued by the Tahsildar, Inkollu;

and Ex.A.4 is the Original General Power of Attorney dated 16-11-2021 under endorsement No.M.V.1592/2021 D.R.O., Ongole executed by the 4th

Plaintiff on 13-10-2021 in favour of the 2nd Plaintiff attested by notary

Public, Maryland, U.S.A.

05. Heard, perused the material on record.

06. Now, the point for determination is”

Whether the plaintifs are entitled for the suit claim as

prayed for?

POINT :

07.Plaintiffs 1 and 2 to prove that, defendant borrowed an amount of Rs.50,00,000/- (Rupees Fifty lakhs only) on 09.07.2018 by mortgaging the schedule property, got examined themselves as PWs. 2 and P.W.1 respectively, filed their chief-affidavits by reiterating the plaint contents stating about borrowing of amount of Rs. 50,00,000/- by the defendant by mortgaging the suit schedule property, and made part payment of Rs.10,00,000/- and Rs.5,00,000/- on 23-12-2019 and 18-02- 2020 respectively and failure of the defendant to repay the loan amount despite repeated demands, resulting in filing of the suit. Thus, PWs 1 and 4 O.S. No.01 of 2022, Dt: 06.09.2023 2 strengthened their case. As there is no other evidence on record to rebut the said testimonies of PWs 1 and 2, it becomes undisputed testimony and the same has to be relied on.

08. Apart from the unchallenged testimony of PWs 1 and 2, Ex A.1 discloses about the borrowing of money by the defendant for an amount of Rs. 50,00,000/- from the 1st plaintiff and one Ravipudi Padmavathi and coupled with Ex.A.2 to A.4. Hence, this Court, by considering the unquestioned testimony of Pws.1 and 2 coupled with Exs A1 to A.4, holds that, plaintiffs are entitled for recovery of amount as prayed for.

09.For the above said reasons, this Court holds that, the defendant having borrowed an amount of Rs.50,00,000/- (Rupees Fifty

Lakhs only) from the plaintiff and Ravipudi Padmavathi by mortgaging schedule property, and made part payments of Rs.10,00,000/- and

Rs.5,00,000/- had failed to repay the same and thus, the defendant liable to pay the suit amount with interest.

Accordingly, this Point is determined.

10. In the result, the suit is preliminarily decreed with costs, for a sum of Rs.39,31,792/-(Rupees Thirty nine thousand thirty one thousand seven hundred and ninety two only) together with interest at the rate of 3% per annum from the date of filing of the suit, till the date of decree and thereafter 3% p.a., till the date of realization on the principal amount of Rs.39,31,792/-. Time granted for redemption is 6 (six) months.

Typed to my dictation by the Personal assistant, corrected andTyped to my dictation by the Personal assistant, corrected and

pronounced by me, in Open Court, this the 6 6 thpronounced by me, in Open Court, this the th day of September, 2023. day of September, 2023.

Sd/-M.Shubhavani

SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE,

PARCHUR. PARCHUR.

5 O.S. No.01 of 2022, Dt: 06.09.2023

// APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE //

Witnesses Examined

For Plaintif For Defendant

PW.1: Ravipudi Srinivasa RaoNone PW.2: Ravipudi Hanumantha Rao

DOCUMENTS MARKED

For Plaintif:

Ex.A1:Original registered mortgage deed dated 09-07-2018 executed by the defendant in favour of the 1st plaintiff and Ravipudi Padmavathi; Ex.A2:Original death certificate dated 06-03-2021 of Ravipudi Padmavathi issued by the Guntur Municipal Corporation; Ex.A3:Certified copy of family member certificate datedc 254-08- 2021 of Ravipudi Padmavathi issued by the Tahsildar, Inkollu; Ex.A4:Original General Power of Attorney dated 16-11-2021 under endorsement No.M.V.1592/2021 D.R.O., Ongole executed by the 4th Plaintiff on 13-10-2021 in favour of the 2nd Plaintiff attested by Notary Public, Maryland, U.S.A.

For Defendant: NIL For Defendant: NIL

Sd/-M.Shubhavani Sd/-M.Shubhavani

S.C.J., PARCHUR. S.C.J., PARCHUR.

6 O.S. 27 of 2022, Dt: 06.02.2023

1

H.M.O.P.No.30/2023, Dt.14.09.2023

S.C.J. Court, Parchur.

IN THE COURT OF SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, PARCHUR

Present: Smt M. Shubhavani,

Senior Civil Judge,

Parchur.

Thursday, this the Fourteenth [14th] day of September, 2023

H.M.O.P.No.30 of 2023

Between:

Pidaparthi Ramyateja, w/o.Bhavanam Thirumalareddy, age 26 years, D/o.Pidaparthi Venkata Reddy, R/o.Subbareddypalem, Inkollu Mandal, . . . . . . Petitioner

A N D

Bhavanam Thirumala Reddy, s/o.Ramakrishna Reddy, age 38 years, R/o.Ankireddypalem, H/o.Idupulapadu, Inkollu Mandal, Bapatla District, . . . . . . Respondent.

This petition came before me for final hearing on 12-09-2023 in the presence of Sri M.Ravinatha Reddy, Advocate for the petitioner and the respondent remained ex-parte and upon perusing the petition and other connected material papers on record, and having stood over for consideration till this day this Court delivered the following:

//O R D E R//

This is a petition filed by the petitioner [wife] against the respondent [husband] under Section 13 (1) (ib) of Hindu Marriage

Act,1955 for dissolution of the marriage solemnized on 15-05-2016 in between the petitioner and the respondent on the ground of desertion, and for costs of the petition.

2.The brief averments of the petition are as follows:

The petitioner submitted that, the marriage of the petitioner with the respondent was solemnized on 15-05-2016 at Padmavathi

Venkateswaraswamy Sannidhi Vykuntapuram, Tenali, according to Hindu rites and custom. Immediately after the marriage, the petitioner joined the respondent at Ankireddypalem village and the petitioner has stayed 2

H.M.O.P.No.30/2023, Dt.14.09.2023

S.C.J. Court, Parchur.

there only for a week. On the eve of Ashadamasam, the respondent was taken the petitioner to her parents house on 16-06-2016 stating that he will come back after Ashadamasam. Even after completion of

Ashadamasam, the respondent did not turn up to get the back the petitioner, for which, the parents of the petitioner asked the respondent to get back the petitioner in to his fold, but he refused to come and join with the petitioner. Later, on the intervention of elders and parents of both parties, they put up separate family on 15-10-2016 at

Ankireddypalem. Even during their stay for a period of two months, the respondent did not allow the petitioner for marital life and finally left the home and since then, he has been staying with his parents. As a result of which, the elders visited the house of respondent and requested the respondent to come and join with the petitioner, but there was no positive response from him and he also discloses that he is not having any interest nor any love and affection on the petitioner. The petitioner has waited for more than six years hoping that there will be change in his attitude and intention towards the petitioner, but the same was not materialized, and, therefore, there is no possibility of living together in between the parties and that there is no collusion between them in filing the petition. Hence, the petition.

3. After service of notice, the respondent neither appeared before the

Court either personally or through his counsel to resist the claim of the petitioner nor choose to file counter and the Court set him as exparte.

4.Basing on the pleadings the following points arise for consideration: Whether this petition is to be allowed by dissolving the Whether this petition is to be allowed by dissolving the marriage between the petitioner and the respondent dated marriage between the petitioner and the respondent dated 15-05-2016 , by granting the decree of divorce ? ? 15-05-2016 , by granting the decree of divorce 3

H.M.O.P.No.30/2023, Dt.14.09.2023

S.C.J. Court, Parchur.

5.To prove the case of the petitioner, the petitioner herself is examined as PW.1 and Exs.P1 and P2 are marked.

6.Heard. Perused the material on record. POINT:

7.To prove the case of the petitioner, she got examined himself as

PW1 and got filed her proof affidavit in-lieu of her chief- examination. In the proof affidavit filed by the petitioner, she reiterated the petition contents. PW1 stated about his marriage with the respondent on 15-05- 2016, the conduct and behavior of the respondent, she lost her confidence over him and that the conduct of the respondent gives her mental agony, and the efforts of the petitioner as well as through mediators are proved futile, as such, she decided to withdraw from the matrimonial company of the respondent, and thus compelling her to file this petition. Thus, PW1 supported her case. As there is no other evidence on record to disprove the said testimony of PW1, it becomes unchallenged testimony.

08. 08.Apart from the undeniable oral testimony of PW.1, Ex.P1 –Apart from the undeniable oral testimony of PW.1, Ex.P1 –

Wedding card dated 15-05-2016 and Ex.P.2 - Notarized marriageWedding card dated 15-05-2016 and Ex.P.2 - Notarized marriage certificate with photo, disclose the marriage between the petitioner andcertificate with photo, disclose the marriage between the petitioner and the respondent. By considering the unquestioned testimony of PW.1the respondent. By considering the unquestioned testimony of PW.1 coupled with Ex.P1 and Ex.P2, this Court holds that, the petitioner iscoupled with Ex.P1 and Ex.P2, this Court holds that, the petitioner is entitled to the dissolution of marriage on the ground of cruelty.entitled to the dissolution of marriage on the ground of cruelty.

Accordingly, the point is determined Accordingly, the point is determined..

09. 09.In the result, this petition is allowed without costs, by dissolvingIn the result, this petition is allowed without costs, by dissolving the marriage solemnized between the petitioner and the respondentthe marriage solemnized between the petitioner and the respondent

dated 15-05-2016 dated 15-05-2016 by granting the decree of divorce.by granting the decree of divorce.

Typed to my dictation by Stenographer, corrected and pronounced by me in open Court, on this the 14rd day of September, 2023.

Sd/-M.Shubhavani

SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE,

PARCHUR.

4

H.M.O.P.No.30/2023, Dt.14.09.2023

S.C.J. Court, Parchur.

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

NO. OF WITNESSES EXAMINED FOR

Petitioner: PW.1: Pidaparthi Ramya Teja (petitioner) Respondent: NIL

NO.OF DOCUMENTS MARKED FOR

Petitioner: Respondent: Ex.P1Wedding card dated 15-05-2016; -Nil

Ex.P2Natarized marriage certificate with photo.

Sd/-M.Shubhavani

S.C.J., Parchur.

5

H.M.O.P.No.30/2023, Dt.14.09.2023

S.C.J. Court, Parchur.

IN THE COURT OF SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, PARCHUR

Present: Smt M. Shubhavani,

Senior Civil Judge,

Parchur.

Thursday, this the Fourteenth [14th] day of September, 2023

H.M.O.P.No.30 of 2023

Between:

Pidaparthi Ramyateja, w/o.Bhavanam Thirumalareddy, age 26 years, D/o.Pidaparthi Venkata Reddy, R/o.Subbareddypalem, Inkollu Mandal, . . . . . . Petitioner

A N D

Bhavanam Thirumala Reddy, s/o.Ramakrishna Reddy, age 38 years, R/o.Ankireddypalem, H/o.Idupulapadu, Inkollu Mandal, Bapatla District, . . . . . . Respondent.

This is a petition filed by the petitioner [wife] against the respondent [husband] under Section 13 (1) (ib) of Hindu Marriage Act,1955 for dissolution of the marriage solemnized on 15-05-2016 in between the petitioner and the respondent on the ground of desertion, and for costs of the petition.

Date of presentation:27.07.2023 Date of filing: 02.08.2023

Cause of Action: for the petition arose, when the marriage of the petitioner was solemnized with the respondent on 15-05-2016 at Venkateswara Swamy Sannidhi, Tenali according to Hindu rites and custom and when the petitioner joined with the respondent at Ankireddypalem village of Inkollu Mandal, when the respondent expressed that that he has no liking towards the petitioner, and at Ankireddipalem village, where the spouse lastly resided together, which is within the jurisdiction of this Court.

Valuation: As this petition is filed under Section 13 (1) (ia) (ib) of Hindu Marriage Act, fixed court fee of Rs.10/- is paid under Schedule II, Art I (vii) of APCF and SV Act.

This petition came before me for final hearing on 12-09-2023 in the presence of Sri M.Ravinatha Reddy, Advocate for the petitioner and the respondent remained ex-parte and upon perusing the petition and other connected material papers on record, and having stood over for consideration till this day, this Court, doth order and IN ALLOWING THE PETITION:

6

H.M.O.P.No.30/2023, Dt.14.09.2023

S.C.J. Court, Parchur.

a. That the marriage between the petitioner-wife and the respondent-husband solemnized on 15-05-2016 be and the same is hereby dissolved by way of decree of divorce; and b. That there be no order as to costs.

Given under my hand and the seal of Court, this the 14th day of September, 2023.

Sd/-M.Shubhavani

SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE,

PARCHUR.

// TABLE OF COSTS //

Costs memo and fee certificate not filed on either side

Sd/-M.Shubhavani

S.C.J., Parchur.

7

H.M.O.P.No.30/2023, Dt.14.09.2023

S.C.J. Court, Parchur.

// TRUE COPY //

S.C.J., Parchur.

1

IN THE COURT OF VI ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE, MARKAPUR.

Smt M. Shubha Vani, VI Additional District Judge, Prakasam at Markapur.

Monday, this the Twenty Seventh (27th) day of April, 2026.

DIVORCE O.P.NO.38 OF 2022.

Between:

Gaddam Prasad, s/o Satya Babu, aged about 37 years, Christian, Employee, r/o Obbapuram, Donakonda Village and Mandal, Prakasam District.

....Petitioner

Vs.,

Gaddam Leela Rani, w/o Prasad, d/o Dasari Chalapathi Rao (Late), aged about 33 years, Christian, r/o D.No.32-36-15, Madhuri Nilayam, Water Tank Road, Machavaram, Vijayawada-4, Krishna District.….Respondents

This petition is presented before me on 27.04.2026 for Mediation

before this court in the presence of Sri M. Vijaya Anand, Learned Counsel

for the Petitioner and of Sri P. Ravindra Babu, Learned Advocate for

Respondent and upon perusing the material papers available on record and having stood over to this day for consideration this Court delivered the following:-

// O R D E R //

This is a petition filed under Sections 10(i), (ix), and (x) of the Indian

Divorce Act, praying for a decree of divorce in favour of the petitioner (husband) by dissolving the marriage solemnized on 27.09.2018 between the petitioner (husband) and respondent(wife) on the grounds of cruelty and desertion, along with costs of the petition.

2 DOP.No.38 of 2022

2.During the course of proceedings, both parties expressed their willingness to settle the dispute amicably. Accordingly, this Court, in exercise of powers under Section 89 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, referred the matter to the Mediation Centre, Markapur.

3.Pursuant to the said reference, both parties appeared before the

Mediation Centre on 27-04-2026 and, with the assistance of the Mediator, voluntarily entered into a settlement agreement, resolving all their disputes.

4.The settlement agreement has been duly signed by both parties, their respective counsel, and the Mediator. This Court has carefully perused the terms of the settlement and is satisfied that the same has been entered into voluntarily, without coercion or undue influence, and is lawful.

5.The terms of settlement are as follows:

1. The petitioner and respondent have mutually agreed to dissolve their marriage and to live separately.

2.The petitioner shall pay a total sum of 25,00,000/- (Rupees Twenty-₹

Five Lakhs only) to the respondent and their minor daughter towards full and final settlement.

3. Out of the said amount:

 A sum of 10,00,000/- (Rupees Ten Lakhs only)₹ shall be deposited in the name of the minor daughter G. Usha Kiran Mai.

3 DOP.No.38 of 2022

4. The respondent agrees that she shall not claim any further maintenance, alimony, or financial benefits from the petitioner in the future and hereby relinquishes all her rights over the petitioner’s properties.

5. The custody, care, and guardianship of the minor daughter shall remain with the respondent (mother). The petitioner shall not interfere in the upbringing of the child.

6. The respondent shall withdraw the following cases filed against the petitioner and his family:

 DVC No. 18/2024 pending before the I Additional Chief Metropolitan

Magistrate Court, Vijayawada.

 C.C. No. 4670/2023 under Sections 498-A IPC and Sections 3 & 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act pending before the II Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate Court, Vijayawada.

7. Both parties hereby declare that all disputes arising out of their matrimonial relationship have been fully and finally settled, and neither party has any further claims against the other.

6.This Court finds that:

 The settlement is lawful and valid.  The parties have voluntarily entered into the agreement.  No further adjudication is required.

7.Both parties present. Settlement agreement received from Mediation

Centre, Markapur. Both parties reported no objection to the settlement and declared that they have voluntarily and willingly arrived at the settlement in the presence of the mediator.

4 DOP.No.38 of 2022

8.In the result, decree is passed by dissolving the marriage of petitioner and respondent solemnized on 27.09.2018 as per the terms of

Mediation Agreement dated 27.04.2026 entered into by both parties before mediator at Mediation Centre, Markapur. In view of circumstances of the case, there shall be no order as to costs.

Dictated to the Stenographer Grade-III, transcribed by him,

corrected and pronounced by me in the open Court on this the 27thday of April, 2026.

Sd/- Smt. M. Shubhavani

VI ADDL. DIST. & SESSIONS JUDGE,

PRAKASAM AT MARKAPUR.

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

- NIL - - NIL -

Sd/- Smt. M. Shubhavani

VI A.D.& S.J,

MARKAPUR.

5 DOP.No.38 of 2022

IN THE COURT OF VI ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE, MARKAPUR.

Smt M. Shubha Vani, VI Additional District Judge, Prakasam at Markapur.

Monday, this the Twenty Seventh (27th) day of April, 2026.

DIVORCE O.P.NO.38 OF 2022.

Between:

Gaddam Prasad, s/o Satya Babu, aged about 37 years, Christian, Employee, r/o Obbapuram, Donakonda Village and Mandal, Prakasam District.

....Petitioner

Vs.,

Gaddam Leela Rani, w/o Prasad, d/o Dasari Chalapathi Rao (Late), aged about 33 years, Christian, r/o D.No.32-36-15, Madhuri Nilayam, Water Tank Road, Machavaram, Vijayawada-4, Krishna District.….Respondents

This is a petition filed under Sections 10(i), (ix), and (x) of the Indian Divorce Act, praying for a decree of divorce in favour of the petitioner (husband) by dissolving the marriage solemnized on 27.09.2018 between the petitioner (husband) and respondent(wife) on the grounds of cruelty and desertion, along with costs of the petition.

Court Fee :

Court Fee of Rs.30/- is paid Under schedule II Article 1 (iii) of Andhra Court fee and Suits valuation Act.

This petition is presented before me on 27.04.2026 for Mediation before this court in the presence of Sri M. Vijaya Anand, Learned Counsel for the Petitioner and of Sri P. Ravindra Babu, Learned Advocate for Respondent and upon perusing the material papers available on record and having stood over to this day, this court doth order and decree: -

(i). that the, petition be and is hereby passed by dissolving the marriage of petitioner and respondent solemnized on 27.09.2018 as per the terms 6 DOP.No.38 of 2022 of Mediation Agreement dated 27.04.2026 entered into by both parties

before mediator at Mediation Centre, Markapur.

(ii). that there be no order as to costs.

Given under my hand and the seal of the court, this the 27th day of April, 2026.

Sd/- Smt. M. Shubhavani

VI ADDL. DIST. & SESSIONS JUDGE,

PRAKASAM AT MARKAPUR.

TABLE OF COSTS

C.M. & F.C. not filed

Sd/- Smt. M. Shubhavani

VI A.D.& S.J,

MARKAPUR.