Sri M.Srinivasachari

PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE (SENIOR DIVISION)

Prl District Court Complex, Visakhapatnam · Visakapatnam · Andhra Pradesh

Sri M.Srinivasachari, PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE (SENIOR DIVISION), is posted at Prl District Court Complex, Visakhapatnam, Visakapatnam, Andhra Pradesh, India. 157 court orders on record since 2013. 10 judgments with full text available. Primarily handles OS, S, ATA cases.

157

Total Orders

Judgments

Orders/Month

Postings

Featured Judgments

OS/1077/2015

Ethalapaka Suri Babu vs Sri Chengala Lokanad

13 Nov 2015

1

In the Court of the Principal Senior Civil Judge, Visakhapatnam

Present: Sri M. Srinivasachary, I Additional Senior Civil Judge FAC/Principal Senior Civil Judge

Friday, 13th day of November, 2015

O.S.1077/2015

Between

Sri Ethalapaka Suribabu, S/o.Late Appalanarasayya, Hindu, aged 56 years, residing at Door No.48-15-49, Ashok Nagar, Opp:MVS Jewel Park, Asilmetta, Visakhapatnam.

... Plaintiff

A n d

Sri Chengala Lokanad, S/o.Late Venkata Swamy, Hindu, aged 46 years, D.No.30-7-3/2, Dr.Rama Rao Hospital backside street, Kotha Reddy Kancharapalem area, Kancharapalem, Visakhapatnam-8.

... Defendant

This suit coming on 12.11.2015 for final hearing before me in the presence of Sri Ch.Anand Kumar, Advocate for the plaintiff and the defendant is having been called absent and set ex-parte, having stood over to this day for consideration and this Court delivered the following:

J U D G M E N T

This is a suit for (a) for specific performance of contract, directing the defendant to execute a registered sale deed in favour of the plaintiff in respect of the suit schedule property and receive the balance of sale consideration from the plaintiff (or)

(b) for any reason the defendant fails to execute the sale deed and register the same, the Court may execute the sale deed and register the same in favour of plaintiff in respect of schedule property in terms of agreement of sale dated 19.01.2014.

2. The brief case of the plaintiff:

The defendant for his necessities and to discharge his sundry debts, offered to sell the suit schedule property for a total consideration of Rs.5,00,000/- for which the plaintiff agreed to purchase the same and accordingly the plaintiff paid an advance sale consideration of Rs.4,50,000/- to the defendant on 19.01.2014 and that the defendant having received the consideration, executed an agreement of sale on the even date in favour of the plaintiff, agreed to execute and register a sale deed in favour of the plaintiff and also agreed to receive the balance sale consideration of Rs.50,000/- as and when required by the plaintiff. It is further averred in the plaint that in spite of repeated oral demands made by the plaintiff, the defendant did not choose to perform the part of agreement, though the plaintiff is ready and willing to perform his part of contract and postponing the same on one pretext or the other and that the plaintiff got

2

issued Lawyer's Notice on 10.04.2014 to the defendant to fulfill in terms of the agreement. Having received the same on 15.04.2014 the defendant kept quiet. It is further averred that after demise of Smt.C.Appayyamma the heirs of Appayyamma orally partitioned between them. It is further averred in the plaint that while so, the defendant for his illegal gain and to cause wrongful loss to the plaintiff trying to alienate the suit schedule property in favour of third party, though the plaintiff ready with the remaining balance amount of Rs.50,000/- and the same was intimated by the plaintiff to the defendant. Therefore, the suit is filed for specific performance of agreement of sale.

3.The Defendant failed to appear in spite of issuance of summons and that he was set exparte.

4.The plaintiff examined himself as P.W.1 to prove the execution of Ex.A-1 agreement of sale by defendant in his favour, payment of Rs.4,50,000/- to the defendant and failing to execute a regular sale deed in his favour and in spite of his readiness and willingness to perform her part of contract. Exs.A-1 to A-5 were marked through him.

5.Heard the counsel for the Plaintiff.

6. It is the case of the plaintiff that the defendant executed Ex.A-1 agreement of sale in his favour agreeing to sell the schedule property for

Rs.5,00,000/- and received part of consideration of Rs.4,50,000/- and failed to execute a regular sale deed in his favour in spite of issuance of legal notice covered under Ex.A-2. The defendant who has to assert or deny the execution of Ex.A-1 agreement of sale in favour of plaintiff did not file his written statement and remained exparte.

7.The unchallenged agreement of sale, Ex.A-1 provides that he is the absolute owner of the schedule property and that he agreed to sell the said property for a total consideration of Rs.5,00,000/- and received Rs.4,50,000/- and that the balance of sale consideration is to be paid at the time of Sale Deed registration within three months from the date of Ex.A-1. As I observed earlier,

3

Ex.A-1 is unchallenged. It establishes the fact that there is an agreement of sale between the plaintiff and defendant.

8.Once the evidence on record proves the fact that there is an agreement of sale between plaintiff and defendant, the plaintiff has to prove that he was ready and willing to perform his part of contract and that the defendant failed in his obligation to perform his part of contract. As seen from

Ex.A-1 agreement of sale it was executed on 19.01.2014. The agreement provides that the balance of consideration of Rs.50,000/- is to be paid at the time of Sale Deed registration. The pleading is that the plaintiff is having ready cash and that he was contacting the defendant to obtain regular sale deed in his favour after receiving the balance of consideration that the defendant was postponing the same. Ex.A-3 is the house Document relating to schedule property. It shows that Late Smt.Chengala Appayyamma purchased the schedule property from Gudivada Dalappa and after demise of Smt.Chengala

Appayyamma, her heirs of Appayyamma orally partitioned themselves. Ex.A-4 is the Defendant's House Plan. It shows that the defendant who is the son of

Smt.Chengala Appayyamma in partition got his share. Ex.A-5 is the Legal-heir

Certificate issued by the Mandal Revenue Officer, Visakhpatnam. It proves that the defendant is the legal-heir of Smt.Chengala Appayyamma. The evidence of

P.W.1 is unchallenged. The plaintiff also got marked Ex.A-2 legal notice dated 10.04.2014 requesting the plaintiff to receive the balance of sale consideration and to execute a regular sale deed in her favour. No doubt the plaintiff has not filed the postal acknowledgement. The defendant did not contest the suit that he has not received Ex.A-2 legal notice. Therefore the evidence on record shows that the plaintiff is ready and willing to perform his part of contract.

9.Once the Court comes to conclusion that there is an agreement of sale between them and the plaintiff was ready and willing to perform his part of contract, it is for the defendant to explain why he did not execute a regular sale

4

deed in his favour. The defendant did not contest the suit and remained exparte, therefore the plaintiff is entitled to seek the specific performance of agreement of sale dated 19.01.2014.

10.In the result,

a) the suit is decreed exparte. The defendant is hereby directed to receive balance sale consideration of Rs.50,000/- from the plaintiff, execute and register the sale deed in favour of plaintiff in respect of plaint schedule property within a period of one month from the date of judgment; failing which the plaintiff is at liberty to get it done through process of the Court. In the circumstances of the case, there is no order as to costs.

Dictated to Stenographer Grade-III in the public court, corrected and pronounced by

me in the open court, this the 13th Day of November, 2015.

I ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE

FAC/PRINCIPAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE

VISAKHAPATNAM

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

NO. OF WITNESSES EXAMINED

FOR PLAINTIFF: FOR DEFENDANT:

P.W.1: Ethalapaka Suribabu. NONE

NO.OF DOCUMENTS MARKED FOR

FOR PLAINTIFF:

Ex.A.1:Agreement of Sale dated 19.01.2014 executed by the Defendant in favour of Plaintiff. Ex.A.2: Xerox Copy of Legal Notice dated 10.04.2014 issued by the plaintiff to defendant. Ex.A.3: Defendant House Document dt:06.12.1963.

Ex.A.4: Original of Defendant House Plan (Rough).

Ex.A.5: Xerox Copy of Defendant's Legal-heir Certificate from MRO, Vizag Urban.

FOR DEFENDANT: NIL

I ASCJ

FAC/PSCJ/VSP

OS/67/2014

Yeduru Eswara Satyanarayana Reddy vs Boddu Sankara Rao

17 Feb 2017

IN THE COURT OF THE PRINCIPAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE,

VISAKHAPATNAM

Present: Sri M. Srinivasachary, I Additional Senior Civil Judge FAC/Principal Senior Civil Judge

Friday, the 17th day of February, 2017

O.S.67/2014

Between

Yeduru Eswara Satyanarayana Reddy, s/o Raja Rao Reddy, Hindu, aged 46 years, Residing at D.No.33-1-2, South Jail Road, Allipuram, Visakhapatnam

... Plaintiff

A n d

Boddu Sankararao, s/o late Boddu Ramu, Hindu, aged about 42 years, residing at D.No.8-9-4, Netaji street, China Waltair, Visakhapatnam

... Defendant

This suit coming on 15.2.2017 for final hearing before me in the presence of Sri Y.Venu Gopal, Advocate for the plaintiff and of Sri I.M. Ahmed, Advocate for the defenddant, and the defendant having remained exparte and having stood over to this day for consideration and this Court delivered the following:

J U D G M E N T

1.This is a suit for recovery of a sum of Rs.2,10,583/- from the defendant, together with costs and subsequent interest @ 24% p.a., from the date of suit till realization, basing on a promissory note.

2.In brief, the averments of the plaint are that:

On 23.2.2011 the defendant borrowed an amount of

Rs.1,25,000/- from the plaintiff for the purpose of clearing sundry debts and executed a demand promissory note in favour of the plaintiff agreeing to repay the same together with interest @ 24% per annum either to the plaintiff or to his order on demand. Inspite of repeated demands made by the plaintiff by personally and through elders, the defendant has not paid any amount either towards principal or interest. Hence this suit.

3.The defendant fled written statement denying all the averments of the plaint contending inter-alia that he has no necessity to borrow such huge amount from the plaintiff and that he has no financial capacity to repay if he borrows such huge amount and that only to get wrongful gain the 2 plaintiff has filed the present suit with fraud, forged and fabricated documents and thus prayed to dismiss the suit.

4.On the strength of the above pleadings, the following issues have been settled for trial:

1. Whether the suit promissory note is true, genuine and executed by defendant?

2. Whether the suit promissory note is not supported by consideration ?

3. Whether the plaintiff is entitled for recovery of suit amount as prayed

4. To what relief?

5.On behalf of plaintiff, he was examined as P.W.1 and Ex.A.1 marked and to support the claim of the plaintiff, the scribe of the promissory note was examined as P.W.2. When the matter was posted for cross-examination of

P.W.1 and P.W.2, the defendants failed to appear. Consequently, the cross- examinations of P.Ws.1 and 2 has been recorded 'nil'. The defendants failed to lead any evidence. Notwithstanding such default, this Court proceeded to dispose of the matter under Order XVII Rule 2 of CPC. Accordingly, heard the counsel for plaintiff.

6.ISSUE Nos.1 & 2:

The evidence of P.W.1 would go to show that the defendant borrowed a sum of Rs.1,25,000/- from him on 23.2.2017 to clear his sundry debts, having received the consideration, he executed a demand promissory note under

Ex.A.1 agreeing to repay the same with interest at 24% p.a., Subsequently, the plaintiff made several demands but the defendant did not pay any amount. To support the claim of P.W.1, the scribe of Ex.A.1 suit promissory note was examined as P.W.2. In his chief-examination, he went on to depose the evidence in support of the plaintiff regarding the suit transaction is concerned. Further he added that insptie of repeated demands and requests made by the plaintiff, the defendant did not pay any amount either towards

principal or interest.

7. Inasmuch as P.Ws.1 and 2 were not subjected to any cross- 3 examination, because of the absence of the defendant and his counsel, it was recorded 'nil'. Consequently, the facts spoken to by them in their chief examination stood unchallenged. Perusal of Ex.A.1 would reveal the fact that the consideration of Rs.1,25,000/- was passed thereunder to the defendants on 23.2.2011 and that the genuineness of Ex.A.1 cannot be doubted for the reason that no material of whatsoever nature could be brought on record.

8.It is not out of place to mention here that inference of facts in issue in civil cases have to be drawn upon preponderance of probabilities and on balance of evidence on record and that it is elementary on the part of the parties to the suit to lead evidence in support of their pleadings. In the absence of evidence, the pleadings would not serve any purpose. The silence on the part of the defendants in not choosing to cross examining the P.W.1 and P.W.2 and as well as not tendering their evidence is a sure index to hold that the defendant has admitted the suit claim, however appears to have set up a moon shine defence by way of pleadings. The inaction of the defendant in this regard cannot be lightly ignored and that it is legitimate to draw an adverse inference against him under Section 114 (g) of Evidence Act. If really the defendant has tenable defence nothing prevented him in cross examining

PW.1 and P.W.2 or in entering to witness box to speak in respect of his pleadings so as to affirmatively take the court to repose confidence.

Accordingly I hold that the evidence let in by the plaintiff is quite sufficient to hold that the suit promissory note dt.23.2.2011 is true, valid, supported by consideration and binding on the defendants.

9.ISSUE NO.3:

In-as-much as the plaintiff has been able to prove the fact of borrowing money from him and execution of Ex.A.1 by the defendant on receipt of consideration and subsequently, on his failure to repay the same, the plaintiff is entitled for a decree to recover the suit amount from the defendant.

10.Now the point that falls for consideration is in regard to the grant of pendentilite and future interest concerned. The plaintiff claims the subsequent interest at 24% p.a., but considering the facts of the case such rate of interest is exorbitant. However, this Court feels that it is a fit case where pendentilite interest can be at the rate of 12% p.a., with further interest at the rate of 6% p.a., on the principal sum which this Court could adjudge to a sum of Rs.2,10,583/-, as such granted. Accordingly, I hold under this issue.

11.ISSUE NO.4:

In the result, this suit is decreed to recover a sum of Rs.2,10,583/- from the defendant together with costs and pendentilite interest at the rate of 12% p.a., with further interest at the rate of 6% p.a., till realisation of entire decretal amount on the principal sum adjudged to Rs.2,10,583/-.

Typed to my dictation, corrected and pronounced by me in open court on this the 17th day of February, 2017.

Sd/-M.Srinivasachary

I ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE,

FAC/PRINCIPAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE

VISAKHAPATNAM.

Appendix of evidence No. of witnesses examined for

Plaintiff:Defendants: None

P.W.1 ... Y. Eswara Satyanarayana Reddy P.W.2 ... Baliwada Surya Prakash Narayana Rao No. of exhibits marked for

Plaintiff:Defendants: Nil

Ex.A.1 ... Promissory note dt.23.2.2011 executed byt he defendant in favour of the plaintiff,

Sd/-M.Srinivasachary

I ASCJ/VSP.

OS/1477/2016

Chavakula Satyanarayana vs Muddamsetty Anantalakshmi

22 Feb 2017

IN THE COURT OF THE PRINCIPAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, VISAKHAPATNAM

Present: Sri M. Srinivasachary, I Additional Senior Civil Judge, FAC/Principal Senior Civil Judge

Wednesday, the 22nd day of February, 2017

O.S.1477/2016

Between

Chavakula SAtyanarayana, s/o late Venkanna, Hindu, aged 68 years, r/at Venkateswarametta, Visakhapatnam.

... Plaintiff

A n d

Muddamsetty Anantalakshmi @ Anantha, w/o Venugopal, Hindu, aged about 35 years, D.No.31-20-21/8, Venkateswarametta, Allipuram, Visakhapatnam presently r/at D.No.34/12/2, Lurd Ananda Nilayam, Saliveedhi, Gnanapuram, Visakhapatnam-530004

... Defendant

This suit coming on 21.02.2017 for final hearing before me in the presence of Smt. N.V.S. Latha, Advocate for the plaintiff and the defendant having remained exparte and having stood over to this day for consideration and this Court delivered the following:

J U D G M E N T

1.This is a suit for recovery of a sum of Rs.3,43,866/- from the defendant, together with costs and subsequent interest @ 24% p.a., from the date of suit till realization, basing on a promissory note.

2.On 23.2.2017 the defendant was set exparte, on his failure to appear in spite of receipt of summons.

3.To prove the suit claim, the plaintiff is examined as P.W.1 on his affidavit in lieu of chief examination as required under Order XVIII Rule 4 of C.P.C.

Exs. A.1 to A.3 are marked.

4.The evidence of P.W.1 would go to show that on 10-11-2013 the defendant borrowed a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- from him for the purpose of construction of his house and to meet his domestic needs and and executed a promissory note under Ex.A.1 on the even date in his favour, agreeing to repay the same with interest at the rate of 24% p.a., either to him or to his order.

Subsequently, in spite of repeated demands, the defendant failed to keep up his promise and did not pay any amount, that on 7.4.2016 he got issued a legal notice under Ex.A.2 to the defendant and the same was returned as unserved under Ex.A-3, thereafter the defendant did not pay any amount.

5.The evidence of P.W.1 coupled with Exs.A.1 to Ex.A.3 proved the suit claim. As such the plaintiff is entitled to recover the suit amount from the defendant.

6.Now the point that falls for consideration is in regard to grant of pendentilite and further interests concerned. The plaintiff claims the subsequent interest at the rate of 24% p.a., but considering the circumstances of the case, this Court feels that such rate of interest is exorbitant, however, feels to grant pendentilite interest at the rate of 12% with further interest at the rate of 6% p.a., and accordingly granted on the principal sum which this court could adjudge to a sum of Rs.3,43,866/- upon which amount the plaintiff paid court fee.

7.In the result, the suit is decreed ex-parte to recover a sum of

Rs.3,43,866/- (Rupees Three Lakhs Forty Three Thousand Eight Hundred and

Sixty Six only) from the defendant together with costs and pendentilite interest at the rate of 12% p.a. with further interest at the rate of 6% p.a., till realization of entire decretal amount on the principal sum adjudged to Rs.3,43,866/-.

Typed to my dictation to the Stenographer Grade-II, corrected and

pronounced by me in open court on this the 22nd day of February, 2016.

Sd/-M.Srinivasachary

I ADDL. SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE,

FAC/PRINCIPAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE

VISAKHAPATNAM

Appendix of evidence No. of witnesses examined for Plaintiff:Defendant: None P.W.1 ... Chavakula Satyanarayana No. of exhibits marked for Plaintiff:Defendant: Nil

Ex.A.1 ... Promissory note executed by the defendant in favour of the plaintiff dt.10.11.2013 Ex.A.2 ... Office Copy of Legal Notice issued by plaintiff to the defendant on 7.4.2016. Ex.A.3 ... Returned cover

Sd/-M.Srinivasachary

I ADDL. SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE,

FAC/PRINCIPAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE

VISAKHAPATNAM

OS/1363/2016

Indugubilli Ganga Raju vs Shiak Mohammad Rafi

22 Feb 2017

IN THE COURT OF THE PRINCIPAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, VISAKHAPATNAM

Present: Sri M. Srinivasachary, I Additional Senior Civil Judge FAC/Principal Senior Civil Judge

Wednesday, the 22nd day of February, 2017

O.S.1363/2016

Between

Indugubilli Ganga Raju, s/o Demudu, Hindu, aged 63 years, residing at 4-96/7/3/12, Sri Sai Ram Residence, Gopalakrishna Nagar, Sujatha Nagar, Visakhapatnam.

... Plaintiff

A n d

1. Shaik Mohammad Rafi, s/o late Shaik Abdullah, Muslim, aged about 55 years, residing at D.No.12-160, Ashok Nagar, Chinamushidivada, Visakhapatnam.

2. Shaik Sapoora Begum, w/o Shaik Mohammad Rafi, Muslim, aged about 45 years, residing at D.No.12-160, Ashok nagar, Chinamushidivada, Visakhapatnam.

... Defendants

This suit coming on 14-2-2017 for final hearing before me in the presence of Sri P. Rambabu, Advocate for the plaintiff and the defendants having been reamined exparte and having stood over to this day for consideration and this Court delivered the following:

J U D G M E N T

1.This is a suit for recovery of a sum of Rs.7,02,750/- from the defendants, together with costs and subsequent interest @ 18% p.a., from the date of suit till realization, basing on a promissory note.

2.On 14.02.2017 the defendants were set exparte, when the defendants failed to appear and file written statement.

3.To prove the suit claim, the plaintiff is examined as P.W.1 on his affidavit in lieu of chief examination as required Under Order. XVIII Rule 4 of C.P.C.

Ex. A.1 is marked.

4.The evidence of P.W.1 would go to show that on 25.7.2014 the defendants 1 and 2 borrowed an amount of Rs.5,00,000/- from him to clear their debts and for their family expenses and both of them executed a promissory note under Ex.A.1 on the even date in his favour, agreeing to repay the same with interest at the rate of 18% p.a., either to him or to his order on demand.

Subsequently, in spite of repeated demands the defendants failed to pay either

principal or interest and postponing the same on one pretext or the other.

5.The evidence of P.W.1 coupled with Ex.A.1 proved the suit claim. As such the plaintiff is entitled to recover the suit amount from the defendant.

Court feels that such rate of interest is exorbitant, however, feels to grant pendentilite interest at the rate of 12% with further interest at the rate of 6% p.a., and accordingly granted on the principal sum which this court could adjudge to a sum of Rs.7,02,750/- upon which amount the plaintiff paid court fee.

7. In the result, the suit is decreed ex-parte to recover a sum of

Rs.7,02,750/- (Rupees SEven Lakhs Two Thousand Seven Hundred and Fifty Only) from the defendants 1 and 2 together with costs and pendentilite interest at the rate of 12% p.a. with further interest at the rate of 6% p.a., till realization of entire decretal amount on the principal sum adjudged to Rs.7,02,750/-.

Typed to my dictation, corrected and pronounced by me in open court on this the 22nd day of February, 2017.

Sd/-M.Srinivasachary

I ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE,

FAC/PRINCIPAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE

VISAKHAPATNAM.

Appendix of evidence No. of witnesses examined for Plaintiff:Defendants: None P.W.1 ... Indugubilli Ganga Raju No. of exhibits marked for

Plaintiff:Defendants: Nil

Ex.A.1 ... Promissory note dt.25.7.2014 executed byt he defendant in favour of the plaintiff,

Sd/-M.Srinivasachary

I ASCJ/VSP.

OS/1625/2016

Sabbella Panasa Reddy vs Vadamodula Satyam

21 Feb 2017

IN THE COURT OF THE PRINCIPAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE,

VISAKHAPATNAM

Present: Sri M. Srinivasachary, I Additional Senior Civil Judge FAC/Principal Senior Civil Judge

Tuesday, the 21st day of February, 2017

O.S.1625/2016

Between

Sabbella Panasa Reddy, s/o Nagi Reddy, Hindu, aged 36 years, Business, resding at D.No.10-7-31/2, Ramnagar, Visakhapatnam

... Plaintiff

A n d

Vadamodula Satyam, s/o late Pydayya, Hindu, aged about 55 years, Retired B.G. Loco Driver, PEM No: 010440, Engg. Serice Management Department, Visakhapatnam Port Trust, Visakhapatnam, resident of D.no.25-10-45, Rudravari Veedhi, I Town Area, Visakhapatnam.

... Defendant

This suit is coming on 20.2.2017 for final hearing before me in the presence of Sri K. Ramakanth Reddy, Advocate for the plaintiff and the defendant having remained exparte and having stood over to this day for consideration and this Court delivered the following:

J U D G M E N T

1.This is a suit for recovery of a sum of Rs.5,05,866/- from the defendant, together with costs and subsequent interest @ 24% p.a., from the date of suit till realization, basing on a promissory note.

2.On 17.2.2017 the defendant was set exparte, on his failure to appear in spite of receipt of summons.

3.To prove the suit claim, the plaintiff is examined as P.W.1 on his affidavit in lieu of chief examination as required Under Order. XVIII Rule 4 of

C.P.C. Ex. A.1 is marked.

4.The evidence of P.W.1 would go to show that on 15.11.2015 the defendant borrowed an amount of Rs.4,00,000/- from him for his family expenses and to clear the sundry debts and executed a promissory note under Ex.A.1 on the even date in his favour, agreeing to repay the same with interest at the rate of 24% p.a., either to him or to his order on demand.

Subsequently, in spite of repeated demands made by the plaintiff personally and through elders, the defendant has not paid either principal or interest and postponing the same on one pretext or the other.

5.The evidence of P.W.1 coupled with Ex.A.1 proved the suit claim.

As such the plaintiff is entitled to recover the suit amount from the defendant.

principal sum which this court could adjudge to a sum of Rs.5,05,866/- upon

which amount the plaintiff paid court fee.

7. In the result, the suit is decreed ex-parte to recover a sum of

Rs.5,05,866/- (Rupees Five Lakhs Five Thousand Eight Hundred and Sixty Six

Only) from the defendant together with costs and pendentilite interest at the rate of 12% p.a. with further interest at the rate of 6% p.a., till realization of entire decretal amount on the principal sum adjudged to Rs.5,05,866/-.

Typed to my dictation, corrected and pronounced by me in open court on this the 21st day of February, 2017.

Sd/-M.Srinivasachary

I ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE,

FAC/PRINCIPAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE

VISAKHAPATNAM.

Appendix of evidence No. of witnesses examined for

Plaintiff:Defendants: None

P.W.1 ... Sabbella Panasa Reddy No. of exhibits marked for

Plaintiff:Defendants: Nil

Ex.A.1 ... Promissory note dt.15.11.2015 executed byt he defendant in favour of the plaintiff,

Sd/-M.Srinivasachary

I ASCJ/VSP.

Order Record 156 total

Case No.	Parties	Date	Type	Outcome
OS/1363/2016	Indugubilli Ganga Raju vs Shiak Mohammad Rafi	22 Feb 2017	JUDGEMENT	—
OS/1477/2016	Chavakula Satyanarayana vs Muddamsetty Anantalakshmi	22 Feb 2017	JUDGEMENT	—
OS/1608/2016	Bijjam Rami Reddy vs Batha Satya Venkata Gopi	21 Feb 2017	JUDGEMENT	—
OS/1625/2016	Sabbella Panasa Reddy vs Vadamodula Satyam	21 Feb 2017	JUDGEMENT	—
OS/67/2014	Yeduru Eswara Satyanarayana Reddy vs Boddu Sankara Rao	17 Feb 2017	JUDGEMENT	—
OS/1084/2016	Lalam Kannam Naidu vs Sri Molleti Veera Kumara Swamy	14 Feb 2017	JUDGEMENT	—
OS/1085/2016	Smt. Indana Kumari vs Molleti Veera Kumara Swamy	14 Feb 2017	JUDGEMENT	—
OS/1086/2016	Indana Chittibabu vs Molleti Veera Kumara Swamy	14 Feb 2017	JUDGEMENT	—
OS/886/2016	Bhemarasetty Murali Krishna vs P.Srinivasa Reddy	11 Feb 2017	Order On Exgibit	—
S.O.P/100006/2016	Kuncha Arjuna vs Vadapilli Venkatalakshmi	11 Feb 2017	Order On Exgibit	—
OS/281/2016	Gudivada Chinna Rao vs B.V.L.S.Prasada rao	10 Feb 2017	JUDGEMENT	—
OS/667/2016	Betha Trinadha Rao vs Valli Kanaka Rao	02 Feb 2017	JUDGEMENT	—
OS/1542/2007	Kalidindi Venkateswara Raju vs Nidadhavolu Venkateswara Prasad	23 Jan 2017	JUDGEMENT	—
OS/754/2015	Buridi Lakshmi vs Donda Suridamma	06 Jan 2017	IA ORDER	—
OS/754/2015	Buridi Lakshmi vs Donda Suridamma	06 Jan 2017	JUDGEMENT	—
OS/1111/2014	Bank of Baroda vs Gudivada Vara Prasad Rao	06 Jan 2017	JUDGEMENT	—
OS/901/2016	Attili Bhimalingeswara Rao vs Ms Twisters Car Decors	03 Jan 2017	JUDGEMENT	—
OS/774/2015	Karri Venkata Rama Reddy vs Vudisi Subba Lakshmi	30 Dec 2016	JUDGEMENT	—
OS/772/2013	Kothakota Raju vs V.Mohan Rao	28 Dec 2016	JUDGEMENT	—
OS/946/2016	Rayudu Venkata Ramanamma vs The commissioner, G.V.M.C	28 Dec 2016	JUDGEMENT	—
OS/1633/2013	Akbar Sha vs K. Ram babu	28 Dec 2016	JUDGEMENT	—
OS/1446/2016	Kota Nageswara rao vs Souguat Ali Mullick	27 Dec 2016	JUDGEMENT	—
OS/915/2016	Chilukoti Govinda Lakshmi vs Padimi Narayanamma	23 Dec 2016	JUDGEMENT	—
OS/283/2016	Killi Demudu vs Budimuri Venkata Rao	22 Dec 2016	JUDGEMENT	—
OS/1803/2014	Gondyala Ramireddy vs Pabbisetti Prasada Rao	21 Dec 2016	JUDGEMENT	—
OS/1167/2014	Chettu Chinnammadu vs Dusi Sanjeeva Rao	19 Dec 2016	JUDGEMENT	—
OS/909/2016	Smt.Voonna Jyothi vs Sooru Ramesh Gupta	07 Dec 2016	JUDGEMENT	—
OS/778/2016	Maruvda Suryaprakash vs Palla Seshagiri Rao	05 Dec 2016	JUDGEMENT	—
OS/850/2015	Y.K.Madhusudhan vs Sri Vatsavaya Ravi Varma	23 Nov 2016	JUDGEMENT	—
OS/1256/2016	Dadi Suresh vs Kottalanka Malla Rao	22 Nov 2016	JUDGEMENT	—
OS/994/2010	Meesala Chinnam Naidu vs Meesala Suri Naidu	21 Nov 2016	IA ORDER	—
OS/994/2010	Meesala Chinnam Naidu vs Meesala Suri Naidu	21 Nov 2016	JUDGEMENT	—
OS/312/2016	Karri Yerramma vs Kadari Venkata Lakshmi	04 Nov 2016	JUDGEMENT	—
OS/765/2015	Gavara Atcheelu vs V.Ramu	04 Nov 2016	JUDGEMENT	—
S.O.P/100023/2016	Yelasri Satyavathi vs Nil	23 Sep 2016	Order On Exgibit	—
OS/416/2013	Mallepu Divakar vs Gujju Kanaka Mahalakshmi	22 Sep 2016	Order On Exgibit	—
OS/395/2016	Neerupalli Srinivasa Rao vs Vs1. Narala Suryanarayana	20 Sep 2016	Order On Exgibit	—
S.O.P/100012/2015	Bapatla Prakasarao vs Nil	19 Sep 2016	Order On Exgibit	—
OS/384/2016	Medapati Veera Lakshmi vs Vadisi Pardha saradi rao	16 Sep 2016	Order On Exgibit	—
OS/572/2013	Kovvuri Veerraghava Reddy vs Nadakudhiti Rama krihna	16 Sep 2016	Order On Exgibit	—
OS/313/2016	Kosuru Srinu Murali vs Koppala Chanti	08 Sep 2016	Order On Exgibit	—
S.O.P/100009/2015	Lala Ramkumar Lal vs Nil	08 Sep 2016	Order On Exgibit	—
OS/817/2016	Pydi Narayana Rao vs Gudupu Yellayya alias Raju	06 Sep 2016	Order On Exgibit	—
OS/474/2015	Suggu Uma Maheswari vs Sai Vara Prasad	19 Aug 2016	Order On Exgibit	—
OS/1502/2014	Gunturu Parvathi vs Perla Srinivasa RAo	11 Aug 2016	Order On Exgibit	—
OS/1212/2012	Smt.Gurugubelli Bharathi vs Vasupalli Yellaji	08 Aug 2016	Order On Exgibit	—
OS/209/2016	Doddi Appala Satyanarayana vs Polamarasetti Appa Rao	05 Aug 2016	Order On Exgibit	—
OS/245/2016	Gudisay Venkata surya Satyanarayana Rao vs I.V.Chalapathi Rao	04 Aug 2016	Order On Exgibit	—
S.O.P/100009/2016	Pasupuleti Neeraja Santhan vs Andhra Bank	04 Aug 2016	Order On Exgibit	—
OS/29/2016	Smt. Koyala Srikalyani vs Sri Sangamreddy Ravi Prasad	03 Aug 2016	Order On Exgibit	—
OS/1359/2012	Hidayarthulla Shareef vs Locherla Hema Latha Alias Rani	03 Aug 2016	Order On Exgibit	—
OS/1656/2015	Tadi Surreddy alias suryanarayana reddy vs Goonuru Padmavathi	03 Aug 2016	Order On Exgibit	—
S.O.P/100017/2011	Ch Salenamma vs Admiral Superintendent	03 Aug 2016	Order On Exgibit	—
OS/840/2012	Shriram Chits Private Ltd., vs G.Satyavathi	02 Aug 2016	Order On Exgibit	—
ATA/100253/2011	Katta Narayana Murthy vs Greater Visakhapatnam Municipal Corporation	01 Aug 2016	Order On Exgibit	—
ATA/100265/2011	S.V.Sundar Kumar vs Greater Visakhapatnam Municipal Corporation	01 Aug 2016	Order On Exgibit	—
OS/127/2016	Kommu Srinivasa Rao vs Vs1. Kotla Divya	01 Aug 2016	Order On Exgibit	—
OS/29/2014	Kottakki Satyanarayana vs Rajana Appala Naidu	29 Jul 2016	Order On Exgibit	—
OS/1666/2015	State Bank of Travancore vs Matala Sanyasamma	29 Jul 2016	Order On Exgibit	—
S.O.P/100014/2016	Achanta Krishna Vani vs Nil	29 Jul 2016	Order On Exgibit	—
ATA/100287/2011	Y.Gopala Krishna Murty vs Grearter Visakhapatnam Municipal coproation	25 Jul 2016	Order On Exgibit	—
OS/821/2014	Nilapu Satya Venkata Raja Reddy vs Singuluri Veera Kumar	25 Jul 2016	Order On Exgibit	—
OS/1558/2014	G.Ramana vs E.Narasimham	21 Jul 2016	Order On Exgibit	—
ATA/100002/2009	Bh.Chandra mohana rao vs GVMC, Commissioner	15 Jul 2016	Order On Exgibit	—
OS/527/2015	State Bank of Hyderbad vs Vs1. Sri Tammineni Srinivasa Rao	15 Jul 2016	Order On Exgibit	—
OS/738/2015	Yavarna Jayalakshmi vs Palikala Rambai	15 Jul 2016	Order On Exgibit	—
OS/795/2013	Pittada Rama krishna vs Gujju tirumalaReddy	15 Jul 2016	Order On Exgibit	—
S.O.P/100013/2016	Siyyadri Sadamma vs Nil	15 Jul 2016	Order On Exgibit	—
ATA/100250/2011	Gorle Suryakantham vs Greater Visakhapatnam Municipal Corporation	14 Jul 2016	Order On Exgibit	—
ATA/100126/2011	Nihal Chand Chatrani Mohan vs Greater Visakhapatnam Municipal Corporation	13 Jul 2016	Order On Exgibit	—
ATA/100286/2011	Ms. Uma Hospital vs Grearter Visakhapatnam Municipal coproation	13 Jul 2016	Order On Exgibit	—
OS/158/2014	Gollu Surya Rao vs Sunkara Venkata Rao	12 Jul 2016	Order On Exgibit	—
OS/370/2016	Sri Arabala Sunitha vs Seekari Rambabu	12 Jul 2016	Order On Exgibit	—
OS/1352/2014	M China Venkata Swamy vs M Adinarayana	12 Jul 2016	Order On Exgibit	—
OS/162/2016	Panchadarla Suryakantham vs Bora Venkayyamma	11 Jul 2016	Order On Exgibit	—
OS/434/2015	Ruttala Naidubabu vs Varigala Swetha	04 Jul 2016	Order On Exgibit	—
S.O.P/100027/2012	Satyam Goutam Dev and others vs Shriram Transport Finance Company	04 Jul 2016	Order On Exgibit	—
OS/393/2013	Tetali Rama Reddy vs Tankasala Seshagiri Rao	01 Jul 2016	Order On Exgibit	—
OS/795/2015	Boddeti Manohar vs Sarisa Jagannadha rao	01 Jul 2016	Order On Exgibit	—
S.O.P/100015/2016	Molli Sahithi vs Nil	01 Jul 2016	Order On Exgibit	—
OS/821/2010	Apparabuktha Adinarayana vs Kanakala Kanaka Rao	30 Jun 2016	Order On Exgibit	—
OS/1339/2013	Pilla Apparao n other vs Kothapalli Venkata Apparao	30 Jun 2016	Order On Exgibit	—
S.O.P/100012/2016	Arabi Kumari Satya Lakshmi vs Nil	27 Jun 2016	Order On Exgibit	—
OS/627/2014	T Sudhakar reddy vs Vspentakota Venkata Rao	24 Jun 2016	Order On Exgibit	—
OS/1608/2015	Sabbella Rama Reddy vs Nelli Srinu	24 Jun 2016	Order On Exgibit	—
S.O.P/100011/2016	Pathivada Papayamma vs State Bank of India	24 Jun 2016	Order On Exgibit	—
OS/1/2016	Titti Janaki vs Basana Mangamma	23 Jun 2016	Order On Exgibit	—
OS/1/2016	Titti Janaki vs Basana Mangamma	23 Jun 2016	IA ORDER	—
OS/1417/2015	Velugubantla veeranna vs Koppisetty Ramakrishna	23 Jun 2016	Order On Exgibit	—
S.O.P/34/2015	1. Balabhadruni Suryanarayna vs None	23 Jun 2016	Order On Exgibit	—
S.O.P/100010/2016	Surada Dhanayyamma vs Nil	23 Jun 2016	Order On Exgibit	—
OS/679/2014	battula santha kumari vs Vsakkiri satyanarayana	21 Jun 2016	Order On Exgibit	—
OS/687/2015	Malla Rama Krishna vs Surisetty Venkateswari	20 Jun 2016	Order On Exgibit	—
OS/844/2015	Sumet Kumar Jena vs Kesiboina Appa rao	20 Jun 2016	Order On Exgibit	—
OS/193/2013	Chenna Appa Rao vs Smt.M.Krupa and others	17 Jun 2016	Order On Exgibit	—
OS/1615/2015	Smt. Joga Raju vs Vs1. Yajjala Raja Gopala Rao	17 Jun 2016	Order On Exgibit	—
OS/10/2016	K.Katama Raju vs Varadi Venkata Ramana	16 Jun 2016	Order On Exgibit	—
OS/31/2015	MS Guardian Investments vs Datla Venkata Varaha Appala Narasimha Raju	16 Jun 2016	Order On Exgibit	—
OS/234/2013	Smt.PallaAdi Lakshmi vs Rebaka Nooka Raju and others	16 Jun 2016	Order On Exgibit	—
OS/828/2008	Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd. vs Pydah College of Engineering n Technology	16 Jun 2016	Order On Exgibit	—

Showing 100 of 156 orders — Log in to browse all pages.

Monthly Orders (Last 12 Months)

Feb 2017		12
Jan 2017		5
Dec 2016		11
Nov 2016		6
Sep 2016		9
Aug 2016		14
Jul 2016		23
Jun 2016		30
Apr 2016		14
Mar 2016		14
Nov 2015		9
Oct 2015		10

Frequently Asked Questions

How many cases has Sri M.Srinivasachari handled?

Sri M.Srinivasachari has handled 157 court orders since 2013 at Prl District Court Complex, Visakhapatnam. The average disposal rate is 3 orders per month.

What types of cases does Sri M.Srinivasachari hear?

Based on available records, Sri M.Srinivasachari primarily handles Civil matters (Original Suits, RCA) at Prl District Court Complex, Visakhapatnam.

Where is Sri M.Srinivasachari currently posted?

Sri M.Srinivasachari is posted as PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE (SENIOR DIVISION) at Prl District Court Complex, Visakhapatnam, Visakapatnam, Andhra Pradesh.

Are judgments by Sri M.Srinivasachari available online?

Yes. 10 judgments by Sri M.Srinivasachari are available on Legistro with full text, outcome, and sections cited.

How fast does Sri M.Srinivasachari dispose cases?

Sri M.Srinivasachari disposes approximately 3 cases per month, based on 157 orders handled over their tenure at Prl District Court Complex, Visakhapatnam.

Since when is Sri M.Srinivasachari serving?

Sri M.Srinivasachari has been serving at Prl District Court Complex, Visakhapatnam since 2013.

Case Types

OS 80%

S 11%

ATA 7%

RCA 1%

EP 1%

Posting History

Mar 2016 — Mar 2017

PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE (SENIOR DIVISION) · 138 orders
Sep 2015 — Nov 2015

PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE (SENIOR DIVISION) · 19 orders
May 2013 — May 2013

CIVIL JUDGE (SENIOR DIVISION)
Mar 2013 — Mar 2017

V ADDITIONAL CIVIL JUDGE (SENIOR DIVISION)
Mar 2013 — Mar 2013

I ADDITIONAL CIVIL JUDGE (SENIOR DIVISION)

Other Judges at this Court

Sri Chinnamsetty Raju

PRINCIPAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE

1,274 orders

Sri M. Venkata Ramana

I ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE

5,391 orders

Kum. C.k.gayathri Devi

II ADDL. DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE

749 orders

Sri D.seshayya

III ADDL. DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE-CUM-ACB

0 orders

Sri M.srihari

IV ADDL DISTRICT JUDGE-SPL JUDGE ECONOMIC OFFENCES

2 orders

Sri S. Damodara Rao

SESSIONS JUDGE, MAHILA COURT-CUM-VI ADJ

11 orders

Sri S.Srinivasa Rao

VII ADDL. DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE

736 orders

Smt. P.sri Satya Devi

SPL. JUDGE FOR SC AND ST CASES

1,369 orders

Sri. K.Ratna Kumar

XII ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE

433 orders

Sri. D.vijay Goutam

SPECIAL JUDGE FOR TRIAL AND DISPOSAL OF COMMERCIAL...

130 orders

Smt. M.sobha

XIV ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE

0 orders

Sri K Venkateswara Rao

XV ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE

0 orders

Sri. M.Ramakrishnamraju

V ADDL. DISTRICT AND SESSIONS CUM FAMILY JUDGE

0 orders

Sri P Rajaram

ADDL. FAMILY JUDGE

829 orders

Sri U.u.prasad

II ADDITIONAL FAMILY JUDGE-cum-ADDITIONAL DISTRICT...

0 orders

Sri J Srinivas Rao

III ADDITIONAL FAMILY JUDGE-cum-ADDITIONAL DISTRIC...

1 orders

Sri Y.gopal Krishna

PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE (SENIOR DIVISION)

0 orders

M D V N Sindhura

I ADDITIONAL CIVIL JUDGE (SENIOR DIVISION)

516 orders

Sri Ch. Pavan Kumar

II ADDITIONAL CIVIL JUDGE (SENIOR DIVISION)

761 orders

Dr. Soni Dwarampudi

VI ADDITIONAL CIVIL JUDGE (SENIOR DIVISION)

525 orders

Smt. Dr. K. Sarada

PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE (JUNIOR DIVISION)

515 orders

Smt. V.ganga Bhavani

I ADDITIONAL CIVIL JUDGE (JUNIOR DIVISION)

790 orders

Smt. Y.Premalatha

II ADDITIONAL CIVIL JUDGE (JUNIOR DIVISION)

385 orders

Sri G.Karthik

III ADDITIONAL CIVIL JUDGE (JUNIOR DIVISION)

1,053 orders

Smt. Sindhu Gurram

V ADDITIONAL CIVIL JUDGE (JUNIOR DIVISION)

814 orders

Sri M.Pradeep Kumar

CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, VISAKHAPATNAM

432 orders

Smt. P.Pradeepa

I ADDITIONAL CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, VISAKHAPAT...

14 orders

Sri K.Vasudeva Rao

IV ADDITIONAL CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, VISAKHAPA...

251 orders

Smt K.Sruta Vinda

VII ADDITIONAL JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS...

641 orders

Ms Sri Rajarajeswari Tejaswi Kalaharsti

SPECIAL JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS FOR TRI...

0 orders

Sri P Rajendra Prasad

SPL.MAGISTRATE COURT - I

334 orders

Y.Ganapathi Rao

SPL. MAGISTRATE COURT-III

399 orders

D.viswanadham

SPL.MAGISTRATE COURT VI

10 orders

← View all judges at Prl District Court Complex, Visakhapatnam