Mounika Ponnapalli

1 O.S.No.719/2020 dt.29.03.2023

IN THE COURT OF THE PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT KHAMMAM

Dated, this the 29th day of March, 2023

Present:- Smt. P. Mounika, II Addl. Junior Civil Judge, Khammam. FAC: Prl. Junior Civil Judge, Khammam.

O.S.No. 719 of 2020

Between:

State Bank of India, herein a body corporate constituted under the State Bank of India Act, 1955, and having its Central Office at Madam Cama Road, Mumbai, 400021, and a branch among other places at Khammam, represented by its Chief Manager, by name Aakula Madhava Rao, RASMECCC-22005, Wyra Road, Khammam.

... Plaintiff

And

1. Syamala Sarveswara Rao, S/o. Muttaiah, Age 48 years, Occ. Employee, R/o. H.No.1-13, Peddi Palli, Charla Mandal, Khammam District.

2. Kaliveti Ravi, S/o. Pullaiah, Age 39 years, Occ. Employee, r/o. Police quarters No.B/ 133, S.P office Road, Police Head Quarters, Khammam.

3. Erumalla Babu Rao, S/o. Bala Swamy, Age 42 years, Occ. Employee, R/o. Police Quarters No.B/30, S.P. Office Road, Police Head Quarters, Khammam.

...Defendants

This suit coming before me on 09.05.2022 for final hearing in the presence of Sri R.L.N.Sastry, Advocate for Plaintiff and Sri M.J.Praveen Kumar, Advocate for defendant No.1 and Defendants No.2 and 3 are set exparte; upon perusing the material papers on record, upon hearing the counsel for plaintiff and defednant; and having stood for consideration till this day, the Court passed the following:

J U D G M E N T

1.This is a suit filed under Order VII Rule 1 r/w. Sec. 26 of C.P.C for recovery of Rs.3,57,912/- together with interest @ 15.75% per annum (floating rate of interest) with monthly rests.

2 O.S.No.719/2020 dt.29.03.2023

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

The defendants has approached the plaintiff bank for personal loan vide application dt.14.03.2016 and the plaintiff bank granted loan of Rs.6,00,000/- to the defendant No.1 on 14.03.2016 for which the defendant No.1 has agreed for the terms and conditions of the said loan. The defendant No.1 has received the loan amount on 28.03.2016 and executed personal loan agreement dt.15.03.2016 for which defendants No.2 and 3 stood as guarantee and also executed other relevant documents. The defendant No.1 also agreed to repay the loan amount in 60 monthly equal installments @ Rs.14,600/- per month from the date of execution of concerned documents with interest thereon @ 15.75% per annum. But the defendant No.1 did not repay the installment amount regularly and as such the loan account became NPA on 30.04.2019.

The plaintiff bank made several demands and issued reminders to the defendant No.1 but the defendant No.1 did not choose to the same and hence the plaintiff bank issued notices on 03.09.2019, 02.11.2019, 17.12.2019, 04.01.2020, 31.01.2020, 29.02.2020 and issued legal notice on 12.09.2020 to repay the outstanding balance amount of Rs.3,52,779/- with interest to regularize the account and also issued letter to Commandant, IV Battalion TS

Special Police, Palvoncha Bhadradri Kothagudem on 30.05.2020 to recover the amount from the salary of defendant No.1 and other defendants, even though the defendant No.1 did not come forward to repay the amount. Hence the suit.

3. Summons are served to the defendants. On behalf of defendant No.1,

Sri. M.J.Praveen Kumar filed vakalath and also filed written statement, defendants No.2 and 3 are set exparte on 22.12.2020 and 03.02.2021 respectively.

3 O.S.No.719/2020 dt.29.03.2023

4.The averments of written statement in brief are: The defendant

No.1 vehemently opposed the allegations mentioned in plaint and stated that the defendant No.1 has paid maximum amount of EMIs to the plaintiff bank but due to his ill health the defendant No.1 was unable to pay the remaining EMIs as he is in sick leave and not getting the salary from his employer for which the defendant No.1 requested the plaintiff bank many times to provide some more time to clear the due amount as he could not get his salary in view of his sick leave. The defendant No.1 further submitted that the amounts and entire bank statement shown by the plaintiff bank are totally wrong and created for their convenience and the rate of interest shown by the plaintiff bank is also high and excess and prays this Hon'ble Court to dismiss the petition.

5.Upon perusal of entire pleadings, this court has framed the following issues for consideration on 22.11.2022:

1. Whether the plaintiff is entitled for the recovery of suit amount of

Rs.3,57,912/- as prayed for?

2. To what relief?

6.During the course of trial on behalf of plaintiff, the PW1 was examined in chief and reiterated the contents of plaint and Ex.A.1 to A.15 got marked.

In the cross-examination of PW1, no worthy material was elicited by the learned counsel for the defendant No.1 which could strengthen the contentions of defendant No.1 from the evidence of PW1.

7.After closure of plaintiff evidence, the defendant No.1 reported that there is no evidence on his behalf. Hence the evidence of the defendants is treated as nil and closed.

4 O.S.No.719/2020 dt.29.03.2023

8.Heard the arguments of both counsels.

9.On perusal of entire evidence on record it is observed that the oral evidence of PW1 and documentary evidence of Ex.A1 to A5 establishes that the defendant No.1 borrowed an amount of Rs.6,00,000/- from the plaintiff bank for which defendant No.2 and 3 stood as guarantee and subsequently, the defendant No.1 failed to discharge the liability, inspite of plaintiff’s repeated demands. Hence, from the above discussion it is pertinent to say that the plaintiff has discharged his initial burden and now the burden shifts on to the defendant to disprove the case of the plaintiff.

10.The defendant No.1’s specific contention is that he paid maximum installments and due to his ill health he was in sick leave for which his salary was not been paying by his employer regularly due to which he is unable to pay the installment amount and also requested the plaintiff bank for more time to repay the same. To prove the same, defendant No.1 did not adduce any oral or documentary evidence on his behalf inspite of giving sufficient opportunities to him and failed to adduce any substantive evidence to substantiate his pleadings of his written statement. Despite, the defendant cross-examined the plaintiff, nothing worthy was elicited in his cross-examination to disprove the evidence of plaintiff. Though in his written statement the defendant clinchingly stated that the plaintiff bank has shown wrong details regarding his installments, bank statement and even the rate of interest mentioned is also incorrect and high but he is unsuccessful in proving his contentions as against plaintiff bank and also failed to produce rebuttal evidence in support of his plea.

Except his oral version he did not produce any corroborative evidence for the same. Henceforth, the plaintiff has established his claim.

5 O.S.No.719/2020 dt.29.03.2023

Therefore, basing on the oral evidence of PW1 and documentary evidence of Exs.A1 to A15 and in absence of any oral or documentary evidence in support of defendants pleadings, this Court concludes that the plaintiff bank is entitled for suit amount from the defendant No.1 to 3 with subsequent interest and costs.

11. From the foregoing discussion, this court is of opinion that the plaintiff bank is successful in establishing the case and defendants failed to discharge their due debt under the loan. Hence, the plaintiff bank is entitled for recovery of suit amount with subsequent interest. Accordingly, issue Nos.1 and 2 are decided in favour of plaintiff.

12.In the result, the suit is decreed with costs against the defendants No.1 to 3 and also the defendants No.1 to 3 are jointly and severally liable to pay an amount of Rs.3,57,912/- (Rupees Three Lakhs Fifty Seven thousand Nine hundred and Twelve only) together with interest @ 15.75% per annum, with monthly rests from the date of filing the suit, till the date of realization.

Typed to my dictation by the Stenographer G-III, corrected and

pronounced by me in the open Court on this the 29th day of March, 2023.

FAC: PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE,

KHAMMAM

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

WITNESSES EXAMINED

For Plaintiff:- For Defendant:

PW.1: Mahesh Hannurkar – None-- 6 O.S.No.719/2020 dt.29.03.2023

EXHIBITS MARKED

For Plaintiff:-

Ex.A.1 is agreement letter issued to the defendant No.1 by the plaintiff bank, dt.14.03.2016, Ex.A.2 is personal loan agreement executed in between defendant No.1 and plaintiff bank dt.15.03.2016 Ex.A.3 is Deed of guarantee executed by D2 and D3 in favour of plaintiff bank dt.15.03.2016 Ex.A.4 is authorization letter issued to the authorized officer by the plaintiff bank to represent on behalf of the bank dt.17.10.2020. Ex.A5 is loan account statement dt.19.10.2020 Ex.A6 is requesting notice to D1 to regulate the account dt.03.09.2019 Ex.A7 is requesting notice to D1 to regulate the account dt.02.11.2019 Ex.A8 is requesting notice to D1 to regulate the account dt.17.12.2019 Ex.A9 is requesting notice to D1 to regulate the account dt.04.01.2020 Ex.A10 is requesting notice to D1 to regulate the account dt.31.01.2020 Ex.A11 is requesting notice to D1 to regulate the account dt.29.02.2020 Ex.A12 is legal notice issued to the defendants dt.12.09.2020 Ex.A13 is requesting letter to Commandant dt.30.05.2020 Ex.A14 is postal receipts dt.12.09.2020 Ex.A15 is Authorization letter issued to the authorized officer by the plaintiff bank to represent on behalf of the bank dt.19.12.2022.

For Defendant:- -NIL-

FAC: PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE,

KHAMMAM

OS. NO.1615/2022 DATED 1-05-2023

IN THE COURT OF THE V ADDL.JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE -CUM-

PROHIBITION AND EXCISE COURT, KHAMMAM

Dated this the 1st day of May, 2023.

Present: Smt. P. Mounika, FAC V Addl. Junior Civil Judge – Cum - Prohibition And Excise Cases, Khammam

OS.No.1615/2022

BETWEEN: 1.Kambhampati Ramesh, s/o.Late Kambhampati Pulla Rao, age:65yrs, Occu:Regd employee, R/o.H.no:15-18-96, Prashanti nagar, Khanapuram Haveli, Khammam city and district.

2. Kambhampati Sudhakar rao, s/o.Late Kambhampati Pulla Rao, age:64yrs, Occu:Business, R/o.H.no:15-7-597, Rotary nagar, Khammam city and district.

3. Kambhampati Prakash, s/o.Late Kambhampati Pulla rao, age:61yrs, Occu:Business, R/o.H.no:3-1-14, Sundar Talkies road, Gandhichowk, Khammam city and district.

4. Bavirisetti Jyothi, w/o.Bavirisetti Kameswara rao, D/o.Late Kambhampati Pullarao, Age:55yrs, Occu:Household, R/o.H.no:18-82/1, Nandigama town, Krishna District Andhra Pradesh State.

...Plaintiffs

AND 1.Munigeti Rajakumari, D/o.Late Kambhampati Pulla Rao, age:70yrs, occu:Household, R/o.H.no:4-3-14, Marwadi Bazar, Mahabubabad town and district.

2. To whom so ever it may concern.

...Defendants

* * *

This suit is coming up before me on 26-04-2023 for final hearing in the presence of

Smt. V.Rajeswari Advocate for Plaintiffs and Defendant no.1 & 2 remained set exparte, upon perusing the material papers on record, having heard and stood over for consideration, till this day the court delivered the following:-

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

OS. NO.1615/2022 DATED 1-05-2023

This is a suit filed under Order VII, Rule 1 read with section 26 of Civil

Procedure Code praying this court to declare Plaintiffs and the defendant no.1 are the

Class - I legal heirs and successors of late Kambhampati Pulla Rao who died on 20- 06-2003.

Brief facts of the case :

1.The plaintiff no.1 to 3 are the sons, plaintiff no.4 and the defendant no.1 are the daughters of one Kambhampati Pulla Rao who died on 20.6.2003 at his house at H.no.:3-1-14, Sundar Talkies road, Gandhi chowk, Khamamm city and district due to ill health, leaving behind the plaintiffs and defendant no.1 as his sole class-I legal heirs and successors, since the wife of deceased Kambhampati Pulla Rao by name Kambhampati Janaki also died on 8.4.2016. On 20.6.2003 the plaintiff no.1 approached the Tahsildar, Khammam urban in order to receive the legal heir certificate of her husband Kambhampati Pulla Rao but the Tahsildar, the concerned Tahasildar,

Khammam Urban refused to give the said certificate for getting legal heir certificate, the Office Authorities informed them that they are not the competent authority to give the Legal heir certificate and advised to approach competent Court. Hence the suit.

2. Summons were served to Defendant no.1 & 2 and paper publication filed for Defendant no.2. Despite, giving several adjournments, the defendants failed to appear before this Court. On 25.4.2023, the Defendant No.1 & 2 are set exparte respectively.

3. Heard arguments of Plaintiffs counsel. Perused the entire record.

4.To prove the case of Plaintiffs, Plaintiffs were examined as PW1 and filed respective Chief Examination affidavits and reiterated the contents of their

Plaints and Ex.A1 to Ex.A5 got marked in the Chief Examination of PW1.

5. Now the point that arises for determination is whether the plaintiff and

defendant no.1 are the legal heirs of late Kambhampati Pulla rao, who died on

OS. NO.1615/2022 DATED 1-05-2023

20.06.2003 or not ?

6. To substantiate the case of the plaintiffs, PW1 reiterated the contents of their plaints and exhibited I.e, Ex.A1 is the Meeseva copy of death certificate of deceased Kambhampati Pulla Rao issued by Registrar of Births and deaths,

Khammam Municipality, Khammam district vide registration no.634/2003,

dt:18.7.2003, Ex.A2 is Photostat copy of Aadhar card of plaintiff no.1 (compared

with original), Ex.A3 is Photostat copy of aadhar card of plaintiff no.2 (compared with original). Ex.A4 is Photostat copy of aadhar card of plaintiff no.3 (compared with original). Ex.A5 is Photostat copy of aadhar card of plaintiff no.4 (compared with original).

7.Admittedly in order to challenge the evidence of PW1 along with above exhibits marked, the Defendants are remained exparte. The evidence of PW1 is remained unchallenged. The unrebutted evidence of PW1 coupled with Ex.A1 to

Ex.A5 goes to show that the plaintiff no.1 and defendant no.1 are the legal heirs of

Kambhampati Pulla Rao, who died on 20-06-2003.

8. IN THE RESULT, the suit is decreed without costs by declaring the plaintiffs and defendant no.1 as the legal heirs of Late Kambhampati Pulla Rao who died on 20.06.2003.

Typed to my dictation , corrected and pronounced by me in the open Court on this the 1st day of May, 2023.

FAC V ADDL JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE-CUM

PROHIBITION AND EXCISE COURT, KHAMMAM.

OS. NO.1615/2022 DATED 1-05-2023

-APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE-

WITNESSES EXAMINED

FOR PLAINTIFF: PW.1 – K.Prakash

FOR DEFENDANTS: NONE

EXHIBITS MARKED

FOR PLAINTIFF :

Ex.A1 :is the Original death certificate of deceased Kambhampati Pulla Rao issued by

Registrar of Births and deaths, Khammam Municipality, Khammam district vide registration no.634/2003, dt:18.7.2003,

Ex.A2 :is Photostat copy of aadhar card of plaintiff no.1 (compared with original)

Ex.A3 :is Photostat copy of aadhar card of plaintiff no.2 (compared with original)

Ex.A4:is Photostat copy of aadhar card of plaintiff no.3(compared with original)

Ex.A5:is Photostat copy of aadhar card of plaintiff no.4 (compared with original)

FOR DEFENDANT : NIL

FAC : V ADDL JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE-CUM

PROHIBITION AND EXCISE COURT, KHAMMAM

OS. NO.1615/2022 DATED 1-05-2023

OS No. 1615/2022

Kambhampati Ramesh and others

...Plaintiffs

And

1.Munigeti Rajakimari and another 2.To whom so ever it may concern

...Defendants

Dt. 1-05-2023 :

Judgment pronounced (Vide separate one)

IN THE RESULT :- The suit is decreed without costs by declaring the plaintiffs and defendant no.1 as the legal heirs of Late

Kambhampati Pulla rao who died on 20- 6-2003.

FAC V AJCJ,

Khammam

OS. NO. 181/2023 DATED 1-05-2023

IN THE COURT OF THE V ADDL.JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE -CUM-

PROHIBITION AND EXCISE COURT, KHAMMAM

Dated this the 1st day of May, 2023.

Present: Smt. P. Mounika, FAC V Addl. Junior Civil Judge – Cum - Prohibition And Excise Cases, Khammam

OS.No.1615/2022

Suit presented on : 21-11-2022

Suit filed on : 6-12-2022

BETWEEN: 1.Kambhampati Ramesh, s/o.Late Kambhampati Pulla Rao, age:65yrs, Occu:Regd employee, R/o.H.no:15-18-96, Prashanti nagar, Khanapuram Haveli, Khammam city and district.

2. Kambhampati Sudhakar rao, s/o.Late Kambhampati Pulla Rao, age:64yrs, Occu:Business, R/o.H.no:15-7-597, Rotary nagar, Khammam city and district.

3. Kambhampati Prakash, s/o.Late Kambhampati Pulla rao, age:61yrs, Occu:Business, R/o.H.no:3-1-14, Sundar Talkies road, Gandhichowk, Khammam city and district.

4. Bavirisetti Jyothi, w/o.Bavirisetti Kameswara rao, D/o.Late Kambhampati Pullarao, Age:55yrs, Occu:Household, R/o.H.no:18-82/1, Nandigama town, Krishna District, Andhra Pradesh State.

...Plaintiffs

AND 1.Munigeti Rajakumari, D/o.Late Kambhampati Pulla Rao, age:70yrs, occu:Household, R/o.H.no:4-3-14, Marwadi Bazar, Mahabubabad town and district.

2. To whom so ever it may concern.

...Defendants

* * * CLAIM FOR :

This is a suit filed for declaration, to declare that the plaintiffs and defendant no.1 are the legal heirs of deceased Late Kambhampati Pullarao, who died on 20.6.2003 and to award costs of the suit.

CAUSE OF ACTION AND TERRITORIAL JURISDICTION :

The cause of action for the suit arose on20.6.2003 at khammam. This court has

OS. NO. 181/2023 DATED 1-05-2023

pecuniary and territorial jurisdiction to entertain the suit. VALUATION AND COURT FEE : The suit is valued of Rs. 10,000/- and on which a Court fee of Rs. 786/- is paid under Section 24(d) of T.S.C.F and S.V Act. * * * This suit is coming up before me on 26-04-2023 for final hearing in the presence of smt.V.Rajeswari, Advocate for Plaintiffs and Defendant no.1 & 2 remained set exparte, upon perusing the material papers on record, having heard and stood over for consideration, till this day; this Court doth Order and Decree :

:: D E C R E E ::

1.That the suit be and is hereby decreed by declaring the plaintiffs and defendant no.1 are the legal heirs of Late Kambhapati Pulla rao who died on 20-6-2003.

2.That the suit is decreed without costs.

Given under my hand and the seal of the Court on this the 1st day of May, 2023.

FAC V ADDL JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE-CUM

PROHIBITION AND EXCISE COURT, KHAMMAM.

PARTICULARS OF COSTS

S.NO DESCRIPTION FOR PLAINTIFF Rs. FOR DEFENDANT Rs.

1.Stamps on plaint786/---- 2Stamps on power2/-E 3Stamps on process52/-X 4Stamps on petition--P 5Stamps on documents--A 6Advocate feecost memo not filedR 7Publication charges900/-T 8Misc. & Type charges200/-E

Total 1940/- ---

FAC V ADDL JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE-CUM

PROHIBITION AND EXCISE COURT, KHAMMAM.

OS. NO.181 OF 2023 DATED 1-05-2023

IN THE COURT OF THE V ADDL.JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE -CUM-

PROHIBITION AND EXCISE COURT, KHAMMAM

Dated this the 1st day of May, 2023.

Present: Smt. P. Mounika, FAC V Addl. Junior Civil Judge – Cum - Prohibition And Excise Cases, Khammam

OS.No.181/2023

BETWEEN:

1. Shaik Lathif Bee, w/o.Late Nagul Meera, age:52yrs, occu:Household,

2. Shaik Usman @ Usman Shaik, s/o.Late Nagul meera, age:32yrs, Occu:Private employee, Both are R/o.H.no:5-6-109/A, Pakabanda bazar, Khammam city.

...Plaintiffs

AND

1. Shaik Saleema, w/o.SK.Yakub Pasha, D/o.Late Sk.Nagul Meera, Age:30yrs, Occu:Household, R/o.H.no:5-6-110/1, Pakabanda Bazar, Khammam city.

2. Shaik Safia, w/o.SK.Saidulu, D/o.Late Sk.Nagul meera, age:27yrs, Occu:Household, R/o.H.no:5-6-110/1, Pakabanda Bazar, Khammam city.

3. To whom so ever it may concern.

...Defendants

* * *

This suit is coming up before me on 26-04-2023 for final hearing in the presence of

Sri. V.Rambabu Advocate for Plaintiffs and Defendants no.1 to 3 remained set exparte, upon perusing the material papers on record, having heard and stood over for consideration, till this day the court delivered the following:-

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

This is a suit filed under Order VII, Rule 1 read with section 26 of Civil

OS. NO.181 OF 2023 DATED 1-05-2023

Procedure Code praying this court to declare Plaintiff no.1 & Plaintiff no.2 namely

Shaik Lathif Bee and Shaik Usman @ Ushman Shaik and the defendant no.1 and 2 namely Shaik Saleema and Shaik Safia are the Class - I legal heirs and successors of late Sk.Nagul Meera s/o.Saidulu, who died on 06-09-2015.

Brief facts of the case :

1.The plaintiff no.1 and the defendant no.1 & 2 are the children of the plaintiff no.1. One Shaik Nagul Meera who is the husband of the plaintiff no.1 and father of plaintiff no.2 and the defendants no.1 and 2. The said Shaik Nagul Meera died intestate on 6.9.2015 due to ill-health in his house at Pakabanda bazar,

Khammam. On 30.1.2023 the plaintiff no.1 approached the Tahsildar, Khammam urban in order to receive the legal heir certificate of her husband Shaik Nagul Meera, but the Tahsildar, the concerned Tahasildar, Khammam Urban refused to give the said certificate for getting legal heir certificate, the Office Authorities informed them that they are not the competent authority to give the Legal heir certificate and advised to approach competent Court. Hence the suit.

2. Summons were served to Defendant no.1 & 2 and paper publication filed for Defendant no.3. Despite, giving several adjournments, the defendants failed to appear before this Court. On 26.4.2023, the Defendant No.1 to 3 are set exparte respectively.

3. Heard arguments of Plaintiffs counsel. Perused the entire record.

4.To prove the case of Plaintiffs, Plaintiffs were examined as PW1 and filed respective Chief Examination affidavits and reiterated the contents of their

Plaints and Ex.A1 to Ex.A3 got marked in the Chief Examination of PW1.

5. Now the point that arises for determination is:

Whether the plaintiffs No.1 &2 and defendant no.1 and 2 are the legal heirs of

late Shaik Nagul Meera, who died on 6.9.2015 or not ?

OS. NO.181 OF 2023 DATED 1-05-2023

6. To substantiate the case of the plaintiffs, PW1 reiterated the contents of their plaints and exhibited I.e, Ex.A1 is the Meeseva copy of death certificate of

Sk.Shaik Nagul meera, issued by Registrar of Birth and Deaths, Khammam

dt:23.9.2015, Ex.A2 is Photostat copy of Aadhar card of plaintiff no.1 (compared

with original), Ex.A3 is Photostat copy of aadhar card of plaintiff no.2 (compared with original).

7.Admittedly in order to challenge the evidence of PW1 along with above exhibits marked, the Defendants are remained exparte. The evidence of PW1 is remained unchallenged. The unrebutted evidence of PW1 coupled with Ex.A1 to

Ex.A3 goes to show that the plaintiffs no.1 and 2 and defendants no.1 and 2 are the legal heirs of Sk.Nagul Meera, who died on 6-9-2015.

8. IN THE RESULT, the suit is decreed without costs by declaring the plaintiffs no.1 & 2 and defendant no.1 and 2 as the legal heirs of Late Sk.Nagul Meera who died on 6.9.2015.

Typed to my dictation , corrected and pronounced by me in the open Court on this the 1st day of May, 2023.

FAC V ADDL JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE-CUM

PROHIBITION AND EXCISE COURT, KHAMMAM.

-APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE-

WITNESSES EXAMINED

FOR PLAINTIFF: PW.1 – Sk.Lathif bee

OS. NO.181 OF 2023 DATED 1-05-2023

FOR DEFENDANTS: NONE

EXHIBITS MARKED

FOR PLAINTIFFS :

Ex.A1 :the Meeseva copy of death certificate of Sk.Nagul meera, issued by registrar of births and deaths, Khammam dt:23.9.2015

Ex.A2 : Photostat copy of aadhar card of plaintiff no.1 (compared with original)

Ex.A3 : Photostat copy of aadhar card of plaintiff no.2 (compared with original)

FOR DEFENDANTS : NIL

FAC : V ADDL JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE-CUM

PROHIBITION AND EXCISE COURT, KHAMMAM

OS. NO.181 OF 2023 DATED 1-05-2023

OS No. 181/2023

Sk.Lathif bee Sk.Usman @ Usman Shaik

...Plaintiffs

And

1.Sk.Saleema

2. Sk.Safia 3.To whom so ever it may concern

...Defendants

Dt. 1-05-2023 :

Judgment pronounced (Vide separate one)

IN THE RESULT :- The suit is decreed without costs by declaring the plaintiffs no.1 &2 and defendant no.1 and 2 as the legal heirs of Late Sk.Nagul Meera who died on 6-9-2015.

FAC V AJCJ,

Khammam

OS. NO. 181/2023 DATED 1-05-2023

IN THE COURT OF THE V ADDL.JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE -CUM-

PROHIBITION AND EXCISE COURT, KHAMMAM

Dated this the 1st day of May, 2023.

Present: Smt. P. Mounika, FAC V Addl. Junior Civil Judge – Cum - Prohibition And Excise Cases, Khamamm

OS.No.181/2023

Suit presented on : 9-2-2023

Suit filed on : 13-2-2023

BETWEEN:

1. Shaik Lathif Bee, w/o.Late Nagul Meera, age:52yrs, occu:Household,

2. Shaik Usman @ Usman Shaik, s/o.Late Nagul meera, age:32yrs, Occu:Private employee, Both are R/o.H.no:5-6-109/A, Pakabanda bazar, Khammam city.

...Plaintiffs

AND

1. Shaik Saleema, w/o.SK.Yakub Pasha, D/o.Late Sk.Nagul Meera, Age:30yrs, Occu:Household, R/o.H.no:5-6-110/1, Pakabanda Bazar, Khammam city.

2. Shaik Safia, w/o.SK.Saidulu, D/o.Late Sk.Nagul meera, age:27yrs, Occu:Household, R/o.H.no:5-6-110/1, Pakabanda Bazar, Khammam city.

3. To whom so ever it may concern.

...Defendants

* * * CLAIM FOR :

This is a suit filed for declaration, to declare that the plaintiffs no.1 & 2 and defendants no.1 and 2 are the legal heirs of deceased Late Sk.Nagul meera, who died on 6.9.2015 and to award costs of the suit.

CAUSE OF ACTION AND TERRITORIAL JURISDICTION :

The cause of action for the suit arose on 6-9-2015 at khammam. This court has pecuniary and territorial jurisdiction to entertain the suit.

OS. NO. 181/2023 DATED 1-05-2023

VALUATION AND COURT FEE :

The suit is valued of Rs. 10,000/- and on which a Court fee of Rs. 786/- is paid under Section 24(d) of T.S.C.F and S.V Act. * * * This suit is coming up before me on 26-04-2023 for final hearing in the presence of Sri. V.Rambabu, Advocate for Plaintiffs and Defendants no.1 & 2 remained set exparte, upon perusing the material papers on record, having heard and stood over for consideration, till this day; this Court doth Order and Decree as follows :

:: D E C R E E ::

1.That the suit be and is hereby decreed by declaring the plaintiffs no.1 & 2,defendant no.1 and 2 are the legal heirs of Late Sk.Nagul Meera who died on 6-9-2015.

2.That the suit is decreed without costs.

Given under my hand and the seal of the Court on this the 1st day of May, 2023.

FAC V ADDL JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE-CUM

PROHIBITION AND EXCISE COURT, KHAMMAM.

PARTICULARS OF COSTS

S.NO DESCRIPTION FOR PLAINTIFFs Rs. FOR DEFENDANTs Rs.

1.Stamps on plaint786/---- 2Stamps on power2/-E 3Stamps on process70/-X 4Stamps on petition--P 5Stamps on documents--A 6Advocate feecost memo not filedR 7Publication charges2000/-T 8Misc. & Type charges200/-E

Total 3058/- ---

FAC V ADDL JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE-CUM

PROHIBITION AND EXCISE COURT, KHAMMAM.

1Dated01-05-2023

CC 384of2022

OFJUDICIALMAGISTRATEOFFIRSTCLASS

IN THECOURTcum

--

SPECIALMOBILECOURTATKHAMMAM.

Present:SmtP Mounika, FAC:JudicialMagistrateof FirstClass, SpecialMobileCourt,Khammam 91" dayof May,2023, Datedthisthe

CC, No:3840f2022

(C1.No.65(2018of

P.S. Kamepally)

Between:

‘The State, through the police, Sub-InspeciorP.S. Kamepally.§ of Police, \_~

«Complainant.

And

$/o.Venkaiah,Age48Caste:Yadava,Occ:Business, JakkulaLingaswamy,years,

MAddulapallyvillageofKameyallyMandal,

KhammamDistrict. Rio.

Accused and disposalin for final hearingthe Thisbefore24.04.2023 casecamemeon KamepailyPoliceStationB.V.Krishna

ofLeamedcounsel forA.P.P,fortheSiote,

presence Accusedthe materialrecord,

Reddy.over forLearneduponperusingthe following :paperson

consideration,tllthis day, this courtdelivered stood

LJUDGMENT:

laid charge sheet The Sub-Inspector ofKenzepallyPoliceStationfor Pol 324 of IPC against Accused. the offensesundersections294-b,

The brief facts of theoftheprosec:tionas follows : caseare ‘The complainant lodged10.00hoursby stating 22.04.2018at

1.recorton

had given

ofhermarriage,herfatherJakkulaNageswaraRao that“atthetime

CC 384Dated01-05-2023,

2 of2022 as pasupu-kunkuma.Sincesheis enjoyingthe then, agriculturallandtoher 2 Actes

Venkaiahis used her villagersuncleJakkulaLingaswamy,S/o. saidland.Often,cum agriculturalland.On20.04.2018evening to quarrelwithher withregardto the above stickinhishandsand

by carrying

herhousea heruncleLingaswamycameupon also peltedstones in filthy languageand andherfatherNageswaraRao ‘abused her left handelbow.fear, herDueto a result,she receivedinjuryto them.Asan upon day,herhusbandtookherto andshutthedoors.Nexta intotheirhouse theywent causeddelay hersuchin andprovidedtreatmenttoas hospitalKhammam at she approached theKamepallyPolicestation, of petition.Assuch, submission

againsther

and lodgedcaseJalzkulaLingaswamy. Khammam

of complaint,LW9/M Srinivasa

2.HouseOfficer, Rao,Station (On receipt

punishable

of 2018fortheoffences P.S.Kamepally,registered aCr.No.65 casein up the investigation.Aftercompletionof of IPC and took underSections294-b,324 filed charge-sheet againstAccused, investigationLW10

3.punishableunder fortheoffences Thehastakencognizance Court and issuedto Accused. 294-b,324of IPCsummons Sections

4.furnished of accused,copiesofdocumentsto (On appearancecasewere

AccusedexaminedunderSection as required underof Cr.P.C. Section207was them 294-b,324ofIPC chargesfor theoffencesunderSectionsare 239Cr-P.C,the and explainedto of chargesread againstAccused.Thecontentsareover framed

CC384of

20223

Dated01-05-2023

in Telugu. accusedForwhich,Accuseddeniedthesaidallegationsmade

against

not guilty and him.Pleadedclaimsto be tiled.

5.

In orderitsprosecutionhadmarkedDefactocomplainant toprovecase,

PW1andfatherof Defactocomplainantandmarked asgotEx.P1Ex.P7,Asthe to crucialwitnessesPWIPWGdidtheof ie,(0notsupportprosecutionthe case

LearnedAPPhasgiventheremainingwitnesseswillbe upasnopurposeserved.

‘Thereisincriminatingmaterialavailablerecordagainstthe Accused, noonsuch as the examinationis dispensed undersection313of Cr.?.Cwith, ‘Now,thepoint that for considerationis: arises

6.

Ongoingthroughtheevidenceofprosecution,thePW1/JalaYamuna whois defactocomplainant, deposedthataccuseddidbeather,at theinstanceof not her villagers sheher signature putandpresentedbeforetheand onsomepaperpolice

byher.further deposed that

identifiedThePW1shedoknowtheof the notcontents that lodging of report andalsodeniedAccusedbyher. presentcaseagainst

7.

In orderthe guilt of the accused, though the prosecution bringhome to hadP1P7 gotmarkedbut, nothing worthy examinedPW1toPWGandExhibitsto

Dated01-0"

4

When the

CC 384of2022

beatPW1. showthatthey

Accused

theto elicitedagainstto as wwas

isunfavorable

which turnedhostile,thisisaease Le,PWIto PW materialwitnesses to prosecution.

it is overwhelminglyclear

8.madeSupra, saiddiscussion Fromtheabove

thealleged

whichcouldprove placedonrecord pieceofevidence thatthereisno opinesthatthe such,thisCourt againstPWI.As of accusedpersons harassment

‘Accused beyondreasonable

the guiltofthe bringhome

prosecution:hadfailed

to as againstco the of Accusedand Accordingly,the point is answeredinfavour doubt,

prosecution.

guiltyfor the offencesunder found Accusednot INTHERESULT.thewas 9, is acquittedforthesaid

and accordingly,accused

324ofIPC, Sections294-b, Order(0 in thisnoas therpropertycase, (1)CHP.C.Asro U/Sec.248 offences shallbeforce of the accusedin bonds bail bondsandsurety The theproperty. case and theysetat 437Aof Cr-P.Care todayunder monthssec. periodof sixfrom fora libertyforthwith.

and pronouncedby mein the opencourt,on corrected

this the 01" dayofMay,‘Typedto my dictation,

2023.2

Vane

FAC:Judicial MagistrateOf

IClass,

SpecialMobileCourtKhammam.

CC384 of20225Dated

01-05-2023

None lakkula Nageswar Rao P.W3:JanapatiVeeranna P.W4;NidigondaSaiKumar P.WS:MettelaRamPrasad PW6:T.Krishna

Documentsmarked

For

Prosecution: the Report Ex.P.1:Signatureof P.W.1 on Ex.P.2:Entire161 statementof P.W.1 Ex.P.3:Entire161of P.W.2 statement Ex.P.4:Entire161of P.W statement Ex.P.5:Entire161of P.W.4 statement Ex.P.6;Entire161statementof P.W.S Ex.P.7;Entire161 statementof P.W.6

ForDefence;

NIL- ‘Materialobjectsmarked:ForProsecution~NIL-

For defence

Materialobjectsmarked:-NIL-

Pee

te /

a

FAC :

Magistrate1 Class,

JudicialOf SpecialMobileCourtKhammam,

1 O.S.No.1314/2022 dt.29.03.2023

IN THE COURT OF THE PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT KHAMMAM

Dated, this the 29th day of March, 2023.

Present:- Smt. P. Mounika, II Addl. Junior Civil Judge, Khammam. FAC: Prl.Junior Civil Judge, Khammam

O.S.No.1314 of 2022

Between:

1. Keesara Dayakar Rao, S/o. Raghava Rao, Age 79 years, Occ. Agriculture, R/o. Plot No.65, Hariharapuram, Near DPS School, Vanasthalipuram, Hayathnagar, K.V.Rangareddy, Hyderabad. Presently residing at H.No.6-1-95, VDOs Colony, Khammam.

2. Chanda Vinaya, W/o. Chanda Pradeep Reddy, Age 52 years, Occ. Pvt. Employee, R/o. H.No.5-7-1-65, Hariharapuram, Near DPS School, Vanasthalipuram, Hayathnagar, K.V.Ranga Reddy, Hyderabad.

3. Jammula Vidheyatha, W/o. Jammula Devendar Reddy, Age 48 years, Occ. Home Maker, R/o.H.No.26-112/bn378, Balaram Nagar, Safilguda, Malkajgiri, Hyderabad.

... Plaintiffs

And

1. Jammula Krishna Reddy, S/o. Narayana Reddy, Age 60 years, Occ. Agriculture, R/o. Flat No.203/B, Raghuniketh Apartments, near Mamatha Medical College, Srinagar Colony, Khammam City and District.

2. To whom so ever it may concern.

...Defendants

This suit coming before me on this day for final hearing in the presence of Sri J. Sarat Kumar Reddy, Advocate for Plaintiffs and defendants were set exparte; upon perusing the material papers on record, upon hearing the counsel for plaintiffs; and having stood for consideration till this day, the Court passed the following:

J U D G M E N T

1. The plaintiffs instituted the present suit for seeking declaration that the plaintiffs No.1 to 3 are the legal heirs of late Keesara Jayaprada.

2 O.S.No.1314/2022 dt.29.03.2023

2. The averments of the plaint in brief are that:-

The plaintiff No.1 is husband, plaintiff No.2 and 3 are children of Keesara

Jayaprada who died on 09.07.2021. The deceased Keesara Jayaprada during her life time owned and possessed land to an extent of Ac.2.20 gts in

Sy.No.499 and Ac.0.23 gts in Sy.No.495 of Velugumatla, Khammam Urban

Mandal, Khammam District vide two registered sale deeds vide No.830/1984 and 840/1984 dt.29.03.1984 and 31.03.1984 and the same was alienated to third parties for her family necessities and only 6080 sq.yds was remaining and said Keesara Jayaprada also purchased 355 sq.yds vide Plot No.102 in

Sy.No.791 and 792 of Nadargul Village, Saroor Nagar vide document

No.7237/206 of SRO Champapet dt.31.03.2006. The plaintiffs has obtained the death certificate of Keesara Jayaprada from Registrar, Births and Deaths,

KAPRA Circle, GHMC, Hyderabad vide registration No.1609. Later the plaintiffs approached revenue authorities for legal heir certificate for which the authorities stated that the defendant No.1 has made an application to add his name as one of the legal heirs of late Keesara Jayaprada but the defendant No.1 is brother-in-law of plaintiff No.3 but not the legal heir of deceased Keesara Jayaprada. Hence the plaintiffs approached this court.

Therefore, the plaintiffs prays the Hon’ble Court to declare that the plaintiffs No.1 to 3 are the legal heirs of Late Keesara Jayaprada. Hence the present suit.

3. On 23.03.2023 defendants are set exparte.

4. Heard arguments of plaintiffs counsel. Perused the entire record.

5. Now the point for consideration is :

3 O.S.No.1314/2022 dt.29.03.2023

"Whether the plaintiffs No.1 to 3 are the legal heirs of Late

Keesara Jayaprada or not ?"

6. POINT:

The Plaintiff No.1 is husband, plaintiff No.2 and 3 are the children of deceased Keesara Jayaprada who died on 09.07.2021. To prove the case of the Plaintiffs, the plaintiff No.3 is examined as PW1 and one Jammula

Purushotham Reddy was examined as PW2 and filed chief examination affidavits and reiterated the contents of plaint and Ex.A1 to A4 got marked in the chief examination of PW1 ie., Ex.A1: Meeseva copy of Death Certificate of deceased Keesara Jayaprada dt.04.09.2021, Ex.A2 is Photostat copy of

Aadhar card of Plaintiff No.1 (compared with original), Ex.A3 is Photostat copy of Aadhar Card of Plaintiff No.2 (compared with original), Ex.A4 is

Photostat copy of Aadhar card of Plaintiff No.3 (compared with original).

Admittedly in order to challenge the evidence of PW1 and PW2 along with the above exhibits marked, the defendants are remained exparte.

Hence Ex.A1 to A4 are unchallenged and unrebutted. Therefore, plaintiffs

No.1 to 3 are declared as legal heirs of Late Keesara Jayaprada.

7. In the result, the suit is decreed without costs by declaring the plaintiffs No.1 to 3 as the legal heirs of Late Keesara Jayaprada who died on 09.07.2021.

Typed to my dictation by the Stenographer G-III, corrected and

pronounced by me in the open Court on this the 29th day of March, 2023.

FAC: PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE,

KHAMMAM

4 O.S.No.1314/2022 dt.29.03.2023

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

WITNESSES EXAMINED

For Plaintiff:- For Defendant:

PW.1: J. Vidheyatha – Exparte - PW2: J. Purushotham Reddy

EXHIBITS MARKED

For Plaintiff:-

Ex.A1: Meeseva copy of Death Certificate of deceased Keesara Jayaprada dt.04.09.2021,

Ex.A2 is Photostat copy of Aadhar card of Plaintiff No.1 (compared with original),

Ex.A3 is Photostat copy of Aadhar Card of Plaintiff No.2 (compared with original),

Ex.A4 is Photostat copy of Aadhar card of Plaintiff No.3 (compared with original).

For Defendant:- -NIL-

FAC: PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE,

KHAMMAM