Smt.M.Usha Shree

IN THE COURT OF THE II ADDITIONAL JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE-

CUM-II ADDITIONAL JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF I CLASS

RANGA REDDY DISTRICT AT L.B. NAGAR

Present: SMT M.USHASHREE II Addl. Junior Civil Judge-Cum- II Addl. Judicial Magistrate of I Class Ranga Reddy District at L.B.Nagar

Monday, on this the 14thday of October,2024

O.S. No.1403/2021

BETWEEN: -

Smt S.Naga Veeramba, W/o Sankara Sastry, Aged about 61 yrs, Occ:Retd. Employee, R/o.Plot No.8, Syndicate Officers Colony, Hasmathpet, Bowenpally, Secunderabad. …. Plaintiff

And

Smt Vijaya Lakshmi, W/o Not Known, Aged about 58 yrs, Occ:Housewife, R/o Flat No.201, Laxmi Villa, Laxmi Nagar, Kothapet, Saroornagar, Hyderabad – 500 035.… Defendant

This suit coming before me on26-06-2024 for final hearing in the presence of Sri M.Basith Ali Khan, the Learned counsel for the Plaintiff, and of Sri Gopal Rao Patil, the Learned Counsel for the defendant, and the matter having stood over for consideration till this day, this court delivered the following:-

J U D G M E N T

1.This suit is filed by the plaintiff under Order VII Rule 1 & 2 r/w

Section 10-B of the Telangana Buildings Control Act, 1960 to evict the defendant from the suit schedule property thereby to handover the vacant and peaceful possession to the plaintiff with costs.

: 2 : II Addl. Junior Civil Judge-cum-O.S. No.1403 of 2021 II Addl. Judicial Magistrate of I Class 14th October, 2024 Ranga Reddy District, L.B. Nagar

2.The averments of the plaint, in brief, are as follows:-

The plaintiff submits that the plaintiff is the absolute owner and possessor of Flat No.201, Laxmi Villa, Laxm Nagar, Kothapet, Saroornagar,

Hyderabad. The plaintiff has purchased the said flat in the year 2004 from V.Ranjith, represented by his Agreement Cum General Power of

Attorney Holder (hereinafter referred as “AGPA”) Sri M.Venkateswara

Rao, vide registered Sale Deed Doc. No.1798/2004, dt.03-04-2004.

3.The plaintiff further submits that the plaintiff has given the said premises to the defendant on monthly rent of Rs.7,000/- per month in the year 2016. At the time of occupying the said Flat, the plaintiff and defendant both agreed the terms and conditions and the defendant had paid two months in advance to plaintiff. Subsequently, the defendant paid the rent till December, 2020.

4.The plaintiff further submits that the plaintiff has terminated the oral rental agreement in the month of January, 2019. At the time the defendant promised that she will vacate the premises on getting another rented house by May, 2019. There was a co-owners meeting that was held and in that meeting it was agreed that she will vacate the house premises in six months and agreed to pay Rs.8,500/- per month. The defendant agreed to vacate the premises by December, 2020 but neither executed rental agreement nor vacated the premises. The plaintiff further submits that he has issued notice dt.30-03-2020 to the defendant to vacate the : 3 : II Addl. Junior Civil Judge-cum-O.S. No.1403 of 2021 II Addl. Judicial Magistrate of I Class 14th October, 2024 Ranga Reddy District, L.B. Nagar premises by March, 2020 but defendant failed to vacate. In the month of

November, 2020 once again the plaintiff asked the defendant to vacate the premises and she agreed to vacate by January, 2021 and caused mental agony to the plaintiff by not the premises and causing hardship to the plaintiff.

5.The plaintiff further submits that the defendant started postponing tovacate the premises on one pretext or other. Suddenly, she has remitted an amount of Rs.8,500/- in to the plaintiff’s account on 22-03- 2021 instead of vacating the flat. But on the same day the plaintiff has returned the same because the tenancy was over as per the Personal notice given by the plaintiff to the defendant. But the defendant did not vacate the said premises inspite of repeated requests of the plaintiff, remitting the rent regularly, without adhering not to remit the rent and to vacate the flat. Notice was also given on Whatsapp dt.21-02-2021. The plaintiff issued another notice dt.31-03-2021 giving 7 days of notice to vacate but the said notice was returned with an endorsement as addressee left and again the second notice as issued by plaintiff to the defendant. On 15-04-2021 which was also endorsed as addressee left. The defendant has deliberately got managed the postman and got returned notices. Hence, the suit.

6.Summons were issued to defendant and defendant appeared before the court and filed written statement. Denying the averments of the plaint : 4 : II Addl. Junior Civil Judge-cum-O.S. No.1403 of 2021 II Addl. Judicial Magistrate of I Class 14th October, 2024 Ranga Reddy District, L.B. Nagar and the plaintiff got examined as PW1 and got marked Exs.A1 to A7 in her favour.

7.Cross examination by the counsel for the defendant and it is admitted by the plaintiff that the defendant paid two month rent with security deposit i.e. an amount of Rs.14,000/-. It is denied by the plaintiff that the defendant had paid an amount of Rs.2,00,000/- on 05-12-2018 for daughters marriage of plaintiff. She denied to the suggestion that as the defendant has deposited total amount of Rs.2,14,000/- the tenancy was extended upto June, 2026. She denied to the suggestion that the tenancy period was from June, 2026. It is admitted by the plaintiff that the rent was enhanced from Rs.7,000/- toRs.8,500/- and there was no practice of giving any receipt to the defendant after payment of the rent. The plaintiff denied to the suggestion that the notice was pre-matured and she has no right to terminate the tenancy. She denied to the suggestion that

Ex.P3 and Ex.P5 were not received by the defendant and PW2.

8.The neighbor of the plaintiff is examined as PW2.

9.With this the plaintiff closed their evidence. The defendant failed to adduce any defendant evidence conditionally orders were given even though the defendant failed to adduce the defendant evidence, Hence, the same was closed by the court.

10.Heard the plaintiff and perused the case records.

: 5 : II Addl. Junior Civil Judge-cum-O.S. No.1403 of 2021 II Addl. Judicial Magistrate of I Class 14th October, 2024 Ranga Reddy District, L.B. Nagar

11.Now the point for consideration is “Whether the plaintiff is entitled for the relief as prayed for”?

POINT:-

12.Ex.A1 is sale deed which shows that the plaintiff has purchased the flat from V.Ranjith, represented by his AGPA holder M.Venkateshwar Rao dt.03-04-2004. Ex.A2 is legal notice issued dt.30-03-2022 to vacate the flat, Ex.A3 is legal notice dt.31-03-2021 issued by plaintiff to vacate the premises within 7 days from the receipt of the notice. Ex.A4 is postal receipt showing the notice was sent to the defendant on 31-03-2021.

Ex.A5 is legal notice dt.15-04-2021 given to the defendant to vacate the flat No.201. Ex.A6 is returned postal cover. Ex.A7 is the Aadhar card of the plaintiff.

13.From the evidence of plaintiff and the documents i.e. A1 to A7. It is proved that the plaintiff was owner of the flat No.201 which was purchased from V.Ranjith represented by his AGPA holder Sri

M.Venkateshwar Rao and she was in possession of the same till it was let out to the defendant and the defendant was directed to vacate the flat and in furtherance of which she has sent Ex.A2 and Ex.A3 which were sent to the defendant. But when the defendant did not vacate the premises she has sent Ex.A5, but the same was returned with an endorsement as “Addressee left” and during the course of cross examination by the counsel for the defendant nothing material was elicited nor defendant adduced any to falsify with the case of the plaintiff. this court is of the : 6 : II Addl. Junior Civil Judge-cum-O.S. No.1403 of 2021 II Addl. Judicial Magistrate of I Class 14th October, 2024 Ranga Reddy District, L.B. Nagar opinion that to believe the evidence of plaintiff and opines that defendant ought to have vacate the premises after receipt of the notice but inspite of the receipt of the notice she failed to vacate the premises. Hence, the case of the plaintiff is proved.

14.In the result, the suit of the plaintiff is decreed with costs. The defendant is directed to vacate the premises within three months from the date of this order. Failing which the plaintiff can get the defendant evicted from the premises by following due process of law.

Dictated to the Stenographer, transcribed by her, corrected and pronounced by

me in the open court, on this the 14thday of October,2024.

II Additional Junior Civil Judge-cum- II Additional Judicial Magistrate of I Class Ranga Reddy District at L.B.Nagar

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

WITNESS EXAMINED

For Plaintiff:For Defendant: - N I L – PW1 S.Naga Veeramba. PW2 Banavath Biksha.

DOCUMENTS MARKED

For Plaintiff:

Ex.A1 is Certified copy of registered sale deed dt.03-04-2004.

Ex.A2 is Original personal eviction notice given by plaintiff dt.30-03-2020.

Ex.A3 is Office copy of legal notice dt.31-03-2021.

Ex.A4 is Original postal receipt dt.31-03-2021.

Ex.A5 is Office copy of 2nd legal notice dt.15-04-2021

Ex.A6 is Returned postal cover dt.03-04-2021.

: 7 : II Addl. Junior Civil Judge-cum-O.S. No.1403 of 2021 II Addl. Judicial Magistrate of I Class 14th October, 2024 Ranga Reddy District, L.B. Nagar

Ex.A7 is Attested ID proof of plaintiff Aadhar card.

For Defendant: -N I l -

II Additional Junior Civil Judge-Cum- II Additional Judicial Magistrate of I Class Ranga Reddy District at L.B.Nagar

IN THE COURT OF THE II ADDITIONAL JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE-

CUM-II ADDITIONAL JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF I CLASS

RANGA REDDY DISTRICT AT L.B. NAGAR

Present: SMT M.USHASHREE II Addl. Junior Civil Judge-Cum- II Addl. Judicial Magistrate of I Class Ranga Reddy District at L.B.Nagar

Monday, on this the 14thday of October,2024

O.S. No.1403/2021

BETWEEN: -

Smt S.Naga Veeramba, W/o Sankara Sastry, Aged about 61 yrs, Occ:Retd. Employee, R/o.Plot No.8, Syndicate Officers Colony, Hasmathpet, Bowenpally, Secunderabad. …. Plaintiff

And

Smt Vijaya Lakshmi, W/o Not Known, Aged about 58 yrs, Occ:Housewife, R/o Flat No.201, Laxmi Villa, Laxmi Nagar, Kothapet, Saroornagar, Hyderabad – 500 035.… Defendant

This suit coming before me on26-06-2024 for final hearing in the presence of Sri M.Basith Ali Khan, the Learned counsel for the Plaintiff, and of Sri Gopal Rao Patil, the Learned Counsel for the defendant, and the matter having stood over for consideration till this day, this court delivered the following:-

J U D G M E N T

1.This suit is filed by the plaintiff under Order VII Rule 1 & 2 r/w

Section 10-B of the Telangana Buildings Control Act, 1960 to evict the defendant from the suit schedule property thereby to handover the vacant and peaceful possession to the plaintiff with costs.

: 2 : II Addl. Junior Civil Judge-cum-O.S. No.1403 of 2021 II Addl. Judicial Magistrate of I Class 14th October, 2024 Ranga Reddy District, L.B. Nagar

2.The averments of the plaint, in brief, are as follows:-

The plaintiff submits that the plaintiff is the absolute owner and possessor of Flat No.201, Laxmi Villa, Laxm Nagar, Kothapet, Saroornagar,

Hyderabad. The plaintiff has purchased the said flat in the year 2004 from V.Ranjith, represented by his Agreement Cum General Power of

Attorney Holder (hereinafter referred as “AGPA”) Sri M.Venkateswara

Rao, vide registered Sale Deed Doc. No.1798/2004, dt.03-04-2004.

3.The plaintiff further submits that the plaintiff has given the said premises to the defendant on monthly rent of Rs.7,000/- per month in the year 2016. At the time of occupying the said Flat, the plaintiff and defendant both agreed the terms and conditions and the defendant had paid two months in advance to plaintiff. Subsequently, the defendant paid the rent till December, 2020.

4.The plaintiff further submits that the plaintiff has terminated the oral rental agreement in the month of January, 2019. At the time the defendant promised that she will vacate the premises on getting another rented house by May, 2019. There was a co-owners meeting that was held and in that meeting it was agreed that she will vacate the house premises in six months and agreed to pay Rs.8,500/- per month. The defendant agreed to vacate the premises by December, 2020 but neither executed rental agreement nor vacated the premises. The plaintiff further submits that he has issued notice dt.30-03-2020 to the defendant to vacate the : 3 : II Addl. Junior Civil Judge-cum-O.S. No.1403 of 2021 II Addl. Judicial Magistrate of I Class 14th October, 2024 Ranga Reddy District, L.B. Nagar premises by March, 2020 but defendant failed to vacate. In the month of

November, 2020 once again the plaintiff asked the defendant to vacate the premises and she agreed to vacate by January, 2021 and caused mental agony to the plaintiff by not the premises and causing hardship to the plaintiff.

5.The plaintiff further submits that the defendant started postponing tovacate the premises on one pretext or other. Suddenly, she has remitted an amount of Rs.8,500/- in to the plaintiff’s account on 22-03- 2021 instead of vacating the flat. But on the same day the plaintiff has returned the same because the tenancy was over as per the Personal notice given by the plaintiff to the defendant. But the defendant did not vacate the said premises inspite of repeated requests of the plaintiff, remitting the rent regularly, without adhering not to remit the rent and to vacate the flat. Notice was also given on Whatsapp dt.21-02-2021. The plaintiff issued another notice dt.31-03-2021 giving 7 days of notice to vacate but the said notice was returned with an endorsement as addressee left and again the second notice as issued by plaintiff to the defendant. On 15-04-2021 which was also endorsed as addressee left. The defendant has deliberately got managed the postman and got returned notices. Hence, the suit.

6.Summons were issued to defendant and defendant appeared before the court and filed written statement. Denying the averments of the plaint : 4 : II Addl. Junior Civil Judge-cum-O.S. No.1403 of 2021 II Addl. Judicial Magistrate of I Class 14th October, 2024 Ranga Reddy District, L.B. Nagar and the plaintiff got examined as PW1 and got marked Exs.A1 to A7 in her favour.

7.Cross examination by the counsel for the defendant and it is admitted by the plaintiff that the defendant paid two month rent with security deposit i.e. an amount of Rs.14,000/-. It is denied by the plaintiff that the defendant had paid an amount of Rs.2,00,000/- on 05-12-2018 for daughters marriage of plaintiff. She denied to the suggestion that as the defendant has deposited total amount of Rs.2,14,000/- the tenancy was extended upto June, 2026. She denied to the suggestion that the tenancy period was from June, 2026. It is admitted by the plaintiff that the rent was enhanced from Rs.7,000/- toRs.8,500/- and there was no practice of giving any receipt to the defendant after payment of the rent. The plaintiff denied to the suggestion that the notice was pre-matured and she has no right to terminate the tenancy. She denied to the suggestion that

Ex.P3 and Ex.P5 were not received by the defendant and PW2.

8.The neighbor of the plaintiff is examined as PW2.

9.With this the plaintiff closed their evidence. The defendant failed to adduce any defendant evidence conditionally orders were given even though the defendant failed to adduce the defendant evidence, Hence, the same was closed by the court.

10.Heard the plaintiff and perused the case records.

: 5 : II Addl. Junior Civil Judge-cum-O.S. No.1403 of 2021 II Addl. Judicial Magistrate of I Class 14th October, 2024 Ranga Reddy District, L.B. Nagar

11.Now the point for consideration is “Whether the plaintiff is entitled for the relief as prayed for”?

POINT:-

12.Ex.A1 is sale deed which shows that the plaintiff has purchased the flat from V.Ranjith, represented by his AGPA holder M.Venkateshwar Rao dt.03-04-2004. Ex.A2 is legal notice issued dt.30-03-2022 to vacate the flat, Ex.A3 is legal notice dt.31-03-2021 issued by plaintiff to vacate the premises within 7 days from the receipt of the notice. Ex.A4 is postal receipt showing the notice was sent to the defendant on 31-03-2021.

Ex.A5 is legal notice dt.15-04-2021 given to the defendant to vacate the flat No.201. Ex.A6 is returned postal cover. Ex.A7 is the Aadhar card of the plaintiff.

13.From the evidence of plaintiff and the documents i.e. A1 to A7. It is proved that the plaintiff was owner of the flat No.201 which was purchased from V.Ranjith represented by his AGPA holder Sri

M.Venkateshwar Rao and she was in possession of the same till it was let out to the defendant and the defendant was directed to vacate the flat and in furtherance of which she has sent Ex.A2 and Ex.A3 which were sent to the defendant. But when the defendant did not vacate the premises she has sent Ex.A5, but the same was returned with an endorsement as “Addressee left” and during the course of cross examination by the counsel for the defendant nothing material was elicited nor defendant adduced any to falsify with the case of the plaintiff. this court is of the : 6 : II Addl. Junior Civil Judge-cum-O.S. No.1403 of 2021 II Addl. Judicial Magistrate of I Class 14th October, 2024 Ranga Reddy District, L.B. Nagar opinion that to believe the evidence of plaintiff and opines that defendant ought to have vacate the premises after receipt of the notice but inspite of the receipt of the notice she failed to vacate the premises. Hence, the case of the plaintiff is proved.

14.In the result, the suit of the plaintiff is decreed with costs. The defendant is directed to vacate the premises within three months from the date of this order. Failing which the plaintiff can get the defendant evicted from the premises by following due process of law.

Dictated to the Stenographer, transcribed by her, corrected and pronounced by

me in the open court, on this the 14thday of October,2024.

II Additional Junior Civil Judge-cum- II Additional Judicial Magistrate of I Class Ranga Reddy District at L.B.Nagar

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

WITNESS EXAMINED

For Plaintiff:For Defendant: - N I L – PW1 S.Naga Veeramba. PW2 Banavath Biksha.

DOCUMENTS MARKED

For Plaintiff:

Ex.A1 is Certified copy of registered sale deed dt.03-04-2004.

Ex.A2 is Original personal eviction notice given by plaintiff dt.30-03-2020.

Ex.A3 is Office copy of legal notice dt.31-03-2021.

Ex.A4 is Original postal receipt dt.31-03-2021.

Ex.A5 is Office copy of 2nd legal notice dt.15-04-2021

Ex.A6 is Returned postal cover dt.03-04-2021.

: 7 : II Addl. Junior Civil Judge-cum-O.S. No.1403 of 2021 II Addl. Judicial Magistrate of I Class 14th October, 2024 Ranga Reddy District, L.B. Nagar

Ex.A7 is Attested ID proof of plaintiff Aadhar card.

For Defendant: -N I l -

II Additional Junior Civil Judge-Cum- II Additional Judicial Magistrate of I Class Ranga Reddy District at L.B.Nagar

IN THE COURT OF THE II ADDITIONAL JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE-

CUM-II ADDL. JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE I CLASS

RANGA REDDY DISTRICT AT L.B. NAGAR

Present: Smt M.USHASHREE II Addl. Junior Civil Judge-Cum- II Addl. Judicial Magistrate I Class Ranga Reddy District,L.B.Nagar

Wednesday on this the 18th day of September,2024

C.C. No.8309/2021

(Cr. No.1362/2016of P.S. L.B.Nagar) BETWEEN:

State represented by Sub-Inspector of Police L.B.Nagar Police Station. … Complainant AND Janikuntla Jagan, S/o.Shankaraiah, Age:31yrs Occ:Business, R/o.H.No.1-87, Perapalli (V), Chityal Mandal of Nalgonda District.

…Accused

This case coming before me on 18-09-2024 for final hearing in the presence of Learned Assistant Public Prosecutor for the State and of Sri Vikas Madhukar, the Learned counsel for accused and upon perusing of the material papers on record, and the matter having stood over for consideration till this day this court delivered the following:-

J U D G M E N T

1.The Sub-Inspector of police of P.S. L.B.Nagar has filed a charge sheet against the accused for the offences punishable under Section 304-

A, 337of IPC.

2.The facts of the case are that:On 05-12-2016 at 10:00 hours the complainant/LW1/Sande Saramma lodged a report stating that seven years back the complainant along with her husband Sande Mutyalu and : 2 : II Addl. Junior Civil Judge-Cum-C.C. No.8309/2021 II AddL.Judicial Magistrate of I Class 18th Sept. 2024 Ranga Reddy District, L.B.Nagar their children came to Hyderabad and doing labour work and her husband was working as Security at L.B.Nagar Metro Station as a security Guard since one year. On 05-12-2016 at about 02:30 hours while he was crossing the road in front of D-Mart, L.B.Nagar along with his co-worker

Pochaia has a part of their duty, the accused drove his vehicle in rash or negligent manner and dashed to them. As a result of which the complainant’s husband Mutyalu died on the spot with severe injuries and his co-worker Pochaiah sustained bleeding injuries and was shifted to

Osmania General Hospital for treatment. Hence, the case.

3.The case was taken on file for the offences punishable under Section 304-A, 337 of IPC against the accused.

4.On the appearance of the accused, copies were furnished to him as required under Section 207 of Cr.P.C. The accused is examined

U/Sec.251Cr.P.C, read over and explained to him in vernacular language, for which he pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.

5.In trial, the prosecution has examined altogether (03) witnesses and got marked Ex.P1 toP3. The remaining witnesses were closed by the

Court. Ex.P1 is the Report given by PW1, Ex.P2 is Medical certificate given by PW2, Ex.P3 is Scene of offence panchanama.

6.Now the point for consideration is: “Whether on 05-12-2016 : 3 : II Addl. Junior Civil Judge-Cum-C.C. No.8309/2021 II AddL.Judicial Magistrate of I Class 18th Sept. 2024 Ranga Reddy District, L.B.Nagar

at about 2:30 hours in front of D-Mart, L.B.Nagar the accused

drove the vehicle in a rash or negligent manner and dashed to the

deceased and his coworker due to which he died on the spot, and

co-worker sustained injuries and there by committed the offences

under Sec.304-A, 337 of IPC?”

7.Heard the counsels on both sides.

POINT:

8.PW1 deposed that in the year 2016 at around 2:30 A.m while her husband and his co-worker Pochaiah were crossing the road at D-Mart,

L.B.Nagar, one vehicle dashed her husband due to which he sustained severe head injury and died on the spot. Someone called her and informed about the accident. Immediately she went to Osmania General

Hospital and she stated that she does not know who drove the crime vehicle and the crime vehicle bearing number, mode of accident and did not support the case of the prosecution.

9.Nothing material was elicited during the cross examined by the counsel for the accused.

10.PW2 deposed that on 06-12-2016 at 10:00 a.m he examined one

Pochaiah and found the following injuries: 1) tenderness on the back which are simple in nature and he was informed that the injury was caused in road accident, the accident happened on 05-12-2016.

: 4 : II Addl. Junior Civil Judge-Cum-C.C. No.8309/2021 II AddL.Judicial Magistrate of I Class 18th Sept. 2024 Ranga Reddy District, L.B.Nagar

Accordingly, he issued medical certificate under Ex.P2.

11.Cross examined by the defence counsel: PW2 admitted that the patient came to the hospital one day after the alleged accident. He admitted that the patient did not disclose the place where he met with accident and he also admitted that the above injuries can be caused if a person falls on the ground.

12.PW3 deposed that the police called him to D-Mart, L.B.Nagar and conducted panchanama and obtained his signature in Ex.P3.

13.During the cross examination it was elicited that the scene of offence is a busy area and the accident happened under the Metro Bridge.

It was elicited by the defence counsel that at that time, the metro bridge was under construction and material was dumped on the road. There was no Zebra crossing shown in the rough sketch. The remaining evidence of witnesses were closed by this court.

14.Heard the counsel for defence and the learned A.P.P and in order to prove the case under Sec.304-A IPC, the prosecution needs to prove: I) rash or negligent driving of the accused, II) The death was caused by the

Act of Accused.

15.POINT NO.I: Rash or negligent driving of the accused:

: 5 : II Addl. Junior Civil Judge-Cum-C.C. No.8309/2021 II AddL.Judicial Magistrate of I Class 18th Sept. 2024 Ranga Reddy District, L.B.Nagar

PW1 has stated that she does not know who drove the crime vehicle and also stated that she does not know the mode of the accident and it was elicited by the defence counsel during the cross examination that the scene of offence was busy area and at the time of accident the metro bridge was under construction and material was dumped on the road.

From the evidence of PW1 and 3 there was no possibility for the vehicle to be driven by accused in speedy or rash or in negligent manner at the accident spot.

Hence, the point No.1 is proved against the prosecution.

16.POINT NO.II: Death was caused by the act of Accused:

PW1 deposed that her husband died on the spot when a vehicle dashed her husband and she went to Osmania General hospital to see body of the deceased. Hence, this point is proved in favour of the prosecution.

17.POINT NO.III: The accused has caused the death:

PW1 deposed that she does not know who drove the crime vehicle and also crime vehicle bearing number. The co-worker of the deceased died as a Death Certificate was filed by the police. No eye witnesses and the owner of the crime vehicle was also not produced before the court to : 6 : II Addl. Junior Civil Judge-Cum-C.C. No.8309/2021 II AddL.Judicial Magistrate of I Class 18th Sept. 2024 Ranga Reddy District, L.B.Nagar show that he has given the vehicle to the accused. Hence, the point No.III is answered against the prosecution. Hence, the evidence on record is not sufficient to prove the guilt of the accused and moreso, when the two essential ingredients which are required to prove by the prosecution are not proved. Hence, the accused is acquitted.

18.In the result, accused was found not guilty for the offences punishable under Section 304 (A), 337 of Indian Penal Code, as such, he is acquitted of the same under Section 255 (1) of Cr.P.C. The bail bonds and the surety bonds of the accused shall stands cancelled after expiry of appeal time. No case property is deposited in this case, as such, no property order is passed.

Dictated to the Stenographer, transcribed by her, corrected and pronounced

by me in the open court, on this the 18th day of September, 2024.

II Addl. Junior Civil Judge-Cum- II Addl. Judicial Magistrate of I Class Ranga Reddy District, L.B.Nagar

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

WITNESS EXAMINED

FOR PROSECUTION:FOR DEFENCE: -NIL- PW1S.Saramma.

PW2Dr.D.Venkateshwar Reddy.

PW3H.Krishna.

DOCUMENTS MARKED

: 7 : II Addl. Junior Civil Judge-Cum-C.C. No.8309/2021 II AddL.Judicial Magistrate of I Class 18th Sept. 2024 Ranga Reddy District, L.B.Nagar

FOR PROSECUTION:

Ex.P1 is the Report given by PW1.

Ex.P2 is Medical certificate given by PW2.

Ex.P3 is Scene of offence panchanama.

FOR DEFENCE: - N I L – -

MATERIAL OBJECTS

NIL

II Addl. Junior Civil Judge-Cum- II Addl. Judicial Magistrate of I Class Ranga Reddy District, L.B.Nagar

CALENDAR

II ADDITIONAL METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE-CUM-

II ADDL. JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE I CLASS

RANGA REDDY DISTRICT AT L.B. NAGAR

Wednesday, on this the 18thday of September, 2024

C.C. No.8309/2021

(Cr. No.1362/2016 of P.S. L.B. Nagar) : 8 : II Addl. Junior Civil Judge-Cum-C.C. No.8309/2021 II AddL.Judicial Magistrate of I Class 18th Sept. 2024 Ranga Reddy District, L.B.Nagar

Name of the ComplainantState represented by Sub-Inspector of Police L.B.Nagar Police Station

Name(s) of the AccusedJanikuntlaJagan, S/o.Shankaraiah, Age:31yrsOcc:Business, R/o.H.No. 1- 87, Perapalli (V), ChityalMandal of Nalgonda District.

DATES OF

Offence:05-12-2016

Complaint:05-12-2016

Apprehension of Accused:27-12-2016

Release on Accused:27-12-2016

Commencement of Trial:22-05-2023

Close of Trial:09-07-2024

Sentence or Order:18-09-2024

REASONS FOR THE DELAY:NO DELAY

II Addl. Junior Civil Judge-Cum- II Addl. Judicial Magistrate of I Class Ranga Reddy District, L.B.Nagar

IN THE COURT OF THE II ADDITIONAL JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE-

CUM-II ADDITIONAL JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF I CLASS

RANGA REDDY DISTRICT AT L.B. NAGAR

Present: Smt M.USHASHREE II Addl. Junior Civil Judge-cum- II Addl. Judicial Magistrate of I Class Ranga Reddy District at L.B.Nagar

Wednesday, this the 25thday of September,2024

O.S. No.827/2022

BETWEEN:

1. DamaBharati, W/o.DamaBabu Rao, Aged about 50 yrs, Occ:Housewife, R/o.Plot No.120, Chandragiri Colony, Near Jain Mandir, Safilguda, MedchalMalkajgiri – 500 056.

2. D.Sangeetha, W/o.U.Venkatesh, D/o.DamaBabu Rao, Age:34yrs, Occ:Housewife, R/o.Plot No.120, Chandragiri Colony, Near Jain Mandir, Safilguda, Medchal Malkajgiri – 500 056.

3. D.Archana, W/o.G.Mahesh Kumar, D/o.Dama Babu Rao, Age:31yrs, Occ:Housewife, R/o. Plot No.120, Chandragiri Colony, Near Jain Mandir, Safilguda, Medchal Malkajgiri – 500 056.

4. DamaSai Kumar Sangeetha, S/o.DamaBabu Rao, Age:29Yrs, Occ:Pvt. Employee, R/o.Plot No.120, Chandragiri Colony, Near Jain Mandir, Safilguda, Medchal Malkajgiri – 500 056. …. Plaintiffs

And

1. Mandal Revenue Officer, Balapur Mandal, Ranga Reddy District.

2. All concerned….Defendants

This suit coming before me on 07.08.2024 for final hearing in the presence of Sri K.KarunaSagar, Counsel for Plaintiffs, and the : 2 : II Addl. Junior Civil Judge-cum- II Addl. Judicial Magistrate of I Class Ranga Reddy District at L.B. Nagar defendants were set exparte, and the matter having stood over for consideration till this day, this court delivered the following:

J U D G M E N T

1.This suit is filed by the plaintiffs under Order VII Rule 1 r/w Section 26 of CPC, to declare them as legal heirs of Late DamaBabu Rao.

2.The averments of the plaint, in brief, are as follows:

The plaintiffs submitted that the first plaintiff is the natural mother of the plaintiffs No.2 to 4 and the present suit is filed for declaration of legal heirs. Originally Sri Dama Babu Rao was absolute owner and possessor of suit schedule property bearing H.No.10-12 in Plot No.68, admeasuring 200 sq. yards in Sy. No.203, situated at Nadergul Village,

Balapur Mandal, Ranga Reddy District under Badangpet Municipal

Corporation, Ranga Reddy District, having purchased the same through a registered Sale Deed bearing No.9141/2000 dt.21-11-2000, having registered at Sub Registrar’s Office, Champapet and the same was acquired from the own funds of the Dama Babu Rao and he was in peaceful possession and enjoyment of the suit schedule property.

3.The plaintiffs further submitted that in the year 2006 Dama Babu

Rao who was working in BSNL, used to reside at Plot No.67, Postal

Telecom colony, Gurramguda, Vanasthalipuram along with plaintiffs No.1 to 4 and D.Babu Rao went to his duties as usual and found missing and plaintiff No.1 filed a complaint with police Vanasthalipuram, upon which

Vanasthalipuram police registered a case in Cr.No.777 of 2006, dt.13-11- 2006 under head Man Missing case of Dama Babu Rao, as “Undetected”.

: 3 : II Addl. Junior Civil Judge-cum- II Addl. Judicial Magistrate of I Class Ranga Reddy District at L.B. Nagar

The plaintiffs further submitted that Dama Babu Rao mortgaged the said property with BSNL and obtained loan and the plaintiff No.1 had repaid the same as Dama Babu Rao was declared untraced, and they have got

Reconveyance Deed vide Doc.No.9047/2019, registered at SRO,

Champapet, Ranga Reddy District which was executed by DGM, BSNL in favour of plaintiff No.1. The plaintiffs have stepped into their shoes as they are the only legal heirs to get the property transferred in the name of plaintiffs. Hence, the present case filed to declare them as legal heirs of

Late Dama Babu Rao.

4.The plaintiffs had issued notice to defendant No.1, and publication to defendant No.2.Defendant No.1failed to appear before the court, and no objections were received from defendant No.2. Hence the defendants were set exparte.

5.Plaintiff No.1 has filed chief affidavit and got examined herself as

PW-1 and got marked exhibits A1 to A15. Ex.A1 is the FIR which was registered in Cr.No.777/2006 dt.13-11-2006, Ex.A2 is Final Report given by police Vanasthalipuram which was submitted before VII Metropolitan

Magistrate, Cyberabad at Hayathnagar. Ex.A3 is certificate issued by

police stating that the case was referred as “Undetected”, Ex.A4 is ID card of Dama Babu Rao showing that he worked at BSNL, Ex.A5 is Ration card number, details showing the plaintiffs No.1 to 4 were the family members of Dama Babu Rao, Ex.A6 is copy of ration card showing the plaintiffs 1 to 4 as wife, daughter and son of the deceased,Ex.A7 is Certified copy of the : 4 : II Addl. Junior Civil Judge-cum- II Addl. Judicial Magistrate of I Class Ranga Reddy District at L.B. Nagar sale deed showing that Dama Babu Rao purchased the Plot No.68 from

P.Rangamani dt.31-10-2000, Ex.A8 is Re-conveyance deed executed by the BSNL in favour of the plaintiff No.1 as they have repaid the entire mortgaged loan amount, Ex.A9 is Market value certificate, Ex.A10 is

Encumbrance Certificate showing no encumbrances.

6.Heard the learned counsel for the plaintiffs and perused the documents filed in support of the suit claim. 

7.Now the point for consideration is “Whether the plaintiffs are entitled for the relief as prayed for”?

POINT:

8.The documents filed by the plaintiffs shows that originally the husband of the plaintiff No.1 has purchased Plot from Smt. Rangamani dt.31-10-2000 and later he mortgaged the same with the BSNL and obtained loan. Later he was found missing due to which the plaintiffs have lodged a Crime under Man Missing case and the police failed to find the missing person. As such, they filed a final report before the court at

Hayathnagar and the plaintiff No.1 has repaid the entire mortgaged loan amount to the BSNL and in turn relinquishment deed made in favour of plaintiff No.1. Plaintiffs have also filed ration card showing that plaintiffs

No.2 to 4 of children of the deceased and the plaintiff No.1 as wife. In view of the above discussion, the plaintiffs No.1 to 4 are declared them as legal heirs of Late Dama Babu Rao.

: 5 : II Addl. Junior Civil Judge-cum- II Addl. Judicial Magistrate of I Class Ranga Reddy District at L.B. Nagar

9.In the result, the suit of the plaintiffs is decreed without costs by declaring the plaintiffs 1 to 4 as the legal heirs of Late Dama Babu Rao.

Dictated to the Stenographer, transcribed by her, corrected and pronounced by

me in the open court, on this the 25thday of September, 2024.

II Addl. Junior Civil Judge-Cum- II Addl. Judicial Magistrate of I Class Ranga Reddy District at L.B.Nagar

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

WITNESS EXAMINED

For Plaintiffs: For Defendants -N I L - PW1 Dama Bharathi.

DOCUMENTS MARKED

For Plaintiffs

Ex.A1 is Copy of FIR issued by Police Vanasthalipuram, vide

Cr.No.777/2006 dt.13-11-2006.

Ex.A2 is Copy of Final Report filed by the police Vanasthalipuram before the Hon’ble Court dt.19-02-2007.

Ex.A3 is Copy of Certificate filed by the police Vanasthalipuram, dt.19-11- 2013.

Ex.A4 is Original ID card of the Dama Babu Rao.

Ex.A5 is Copy of National Food Safety card of Dama Babu Rao and family.

Ex.A6 is Copy of details of family of Dama Babu Rao issued by BSNL.

Ex.A7 is Certified copy of Sale Deed bearing No.9141/2000, registered at

SRO, Champapet, Ranga Reddy District, dt.21-11-2000.

Ex.A8 is Certified copy of Reconveyance deed bearing No.9047/2019, registered at SRO, Champapet, Ranga Reddy District, dt.18-05-2000.

Ex.A9 is Market value certificate dt.22-02-2022.

Ex.A10 is Encumbrance Certificate dt.15-04-2022.

Ex.A11 is Aadhar card of Dama Bharati.

: 6 : II Addl. Junior Civil Judge-cum- II Addl. Judicial Magistrate of I Class Ranga Reddy District at L.B. Nagar

Ex.A12 is Aadhar card of Dama Sangeetha.

Ex.A13 is Aadhar card of Dama Archana.

Ex.A14 is Aadhar card of Dama Sai Kumar.

Ex.A15 is Photographs of the suit schedule property along with CD.

For Defendants -NIL - II Addl. Junior Civil Judge-Cum- II Addl. Judicial Magistrate of I Class Ranga Reddy District at L.B.Nagar

IN THE COURT OF THE II ADDITIONAL JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE-cum-

II ADDITIONAL JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF I CLASS

RANGA REDDY DISTRICT AT L.B. NAGAR

Present: SmtM.USHASHREE II Addl. Junior Civil Judge-Cum- II Addl. Judicial Magistrate of I Class Ranga Reddy District at L.B.Nagar

Wednesday, this the 25thday of September,2024

O.S. No.270/2024

BETWEEN: -

1. S.Shailaja @ KadiyalaShailaja, W/o.LateKadiyala Praveen Kumar, Aged about 37 yrs, Occ:Housewife.

2. KadiyalaSaiSnigdha, D/o.LateKadiyala Praveen Kumar, Aged about 13 yrs, Occ:Student.

3. KadiyalaSiddhant Kumar, S/o. Late Kadiyala Praveen Kumar, Aged about 5 years, Occ:Student.

Plaintiffs No.2 and 3 are represented by their mother i.e. plaintiff No.1 as they are minors and being Natural Guardian of the Minors.

All the plaintiffs are residing at: R/o.Plot No.30, Chaitanya Nagar, Near B.D Reddy Garden Hayathnagar, K.V.Ranga Reddy-500 070. …. Plaintiffs

And

1. The Tahsildar, SaroornagarMandal, Ranga Reddy District.

2. All other concerned.

3.PirisingulaSrikanth,S/o. Late P.Sathya Narayana, Aged about 42 yrs, Occ:Business,R/o.#9-7-142, Santhosh Nagar,Champapet, Hyderabad – 500 070. … Defendants

This suit coming before me on23-09-2024 for final hearing in the presence of Sri K.Venkataiah, Counsel for Plaintiffs, and the defendants : 2 : II Addl. Junior Civil Judge-cum-O.S. No.270 of 2021 II Addl. Judicial Magistrate of I Class 24thSeptember, 2024 Ranga Reddy District, L.B. Nagar were set exparte, and the matter having stood over for consideration till this day, this court delivered the following:-

J U D G M E N T

1.This suit is filed by the plaintiffs under Order VII Rule 1 r/w Section 26 of CPC, to declare them as legal heirs of Late Kadiyala Praveen Kumar.

2.The averments of the plaint, in brief, are as follows:-

The plaintiffs submitted that plaintiff No.1 is wife of Late Kadiyala

Praveen Kumar, plaintiffs No.2 and 3 are daughters and son. Late Kadiyala

Praveen Kumar passed away on 07-12-2022 leaving the plaintiffs as legal heirs and successors for his movable and immovable properties. Plaintiffs submitted that the plaintiffs are in need of legal heirs certificate to declare them as the legal heirs of the deceased Late Kadiyala Praveen Kumar. As such, the plaintiff No.1 approached the defendant No.1 on 05-02-2024 for issuance of legal heirscertificate and the defendant No.1 had received acknowledgment on application submitted by the plaintiff. However, he has informed them to approach the court for issuance of the same. Hence, the present case.

3.Summons issued to defendants No.1 and 2, publication filed for defendant No.2, but failed to file written statement and no objections were received from defendant No.3. Hence the defendants were set exparte.

: 3 : II Addl. Junior Civil Judge-cum-O.S. No.270 of 2021 II Addl. Judicial Magistrate of I Class 24thSeptember, 2024 Ranga Reddy District, L.B. Nagar

4. In order to establish the suit claim, the plaintiff No.1 gotherselfexamined as PW-1 and got marked exhibits A1 to A5.Ex.A1 is

Death certificate of late Kadiyala Praveen Kumar, he died on dt.07-12- 2022. Ex.A2 is letter submitted to Tahsildar dt.05-02-2024 to issue legal heirscertificates, Ex.A3 and Ex.A4 are Aadhar cards of plaintiff No.1 and 2,

Ex.A5 is Birth certificate of Kadiyala Siddhant Kumar, i.e. plaintiff No.3 and birth certificate shows that he is son of deceased.

5.Heard the learned counsel for the plaintiffs and perused the documents filed in supportof the suit claim. 

6.Now the point for consideration is “Whether the plaintiffs are entitled for the relief as prayed for”?

POINT:-

7.The documents filed by the plaintiff No.1 being wife and plaintiffs

No.2 and 3 are the children of the deceased and plaintiff. The defendants were remained exparte and did not contest the suit. Hence, the suit is decreed, as such the plaintiffs No.1 to 3 are declared them as the legal heirs of the deceased.

8.In the result, the suit of the plaintiffs is decreed without costs by declaring the plaintiffs as the legal heirs of Late Kadiyala Praveen Kumar.

: 4 : II Addl. Junior Civil Judge-cum-O.S. No.270 of 2021 II Addl. Judicial Magistrate of I Class 24thSeptember, 2024 Ranga Reddy District, L.B. Nagar

Dictated to the Stenographer, transcribed by her, corrected and pronounced by

me in the open court, on this the 25thday of September,2024.

II Additional Junior Civil Judge-cum- II Additional Judicial Magistrate of I Class Ranga Reddy District at L.B.Nagar

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

WITNESS EXAMINED

For Plaintiffs:For Defendants: - N I L - PW1S.Shailaja @ Kadiyala Shailaja.

DOCUMENTS MARKED

For Plaintiffs:

Ex.A1 is Death certificate of late Kadiyala Praveen Kumar dt.07-12-2022. Ex.A2 is Request letter to Tahsildar, dt.05-02-2024. Ex.A3 is Aadhar card of plaintiff No.1.

Ex.A4 is Aadhar card of plaintiff No.2.

Ex.A5 is Birth certificate of plaintiff No.3.

For Defendants: -N I l -

II Additional Junior Civil Judge-cum- II Additional Judicial Magistrate of I Class Ranga Reddy District at L.B.Nagar