Nerella Venkata Hyma Pujitha

III Additional Junior Civil Judge -cum- III Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Khammam

Khammam, PDJ Court Complex · Khammam · Telangana

Nerella Venkata Hyma Pujitha, III Additional Junior Civil Judge -cum- III Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Khammam, is posted at Khammam, PDJ Court Complex, Khammam, Telangana, India. 1,443 court orders on record since 2021. 30 judgments with full text available. Primarily handles CC, STC, OS cases.

1,443

Total Orders

Judgments

Orders/Month

Postings

Featured Judgments

OS/486/2021

Maloth Srinivas vs Vemula Mamatha

31 Mar 2022

OS.486/21 Dt: 31.3.2022

IN THE COURT OF THE V ADDL.JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE,CUMSPL.JMFC,

PROH.&EXCISE CASES:: AT KHAMMAM

Dated this the 31st day of March, 2022.

Present:: Ms.N.V.Hyma Pujitha III Addl.Jr. Civil Judge, Khammam.

FAC. V ADDL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE -CUM-

PROH AND EXCISE CASES, KHAMAMM

O.S.No. 486/2021

Between : Maloth Srinivasu, s/o.Bitcha, 45yrs, Government teacher, R/o.Ganesh township, Yellandu road, Khammam town and district.

...Plaintiff.

And

Vemula Mamatha,w/o.Ravi Babu @ Ravi Kumar, 36yrs, Business, C/o.H.no:12-4-672, Road no.12, B.C.Colony , Opp:Church,TNGO, Raparthi Nagar no.2, Mob:9912588822.

...Defendant.

This suit is coming before me today for hearing in the presence of Sri Syed.Amzad Pasha, Advocates for plaintiff and Defendant remain set exparte; upon perusing the material papers on record, upon hearing; this Court passed the following :

J U D G M E N T

1.This is a suit filed for recovery of Rs. 87,000/- (Rupees eighty seven thousand only ) with costs and interest basing on promissory note.

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

That the defendant has joined the chit in M/s.Margadarsi Chit Fund(P)Limited,

Khammam branch vide chit series LTO11SM holding ticket no.39, which is registered by the Assistant Registrar of chits, Khammam vide PS No.266/2013, Dt:13-9-2013 and its chits,Khammam vide PS No.266/2013, dt:13-9-2013 and its chits registration no.338/2013, dt:5-3-2013 for the value of Rs.3,00,000/- (Rupees three lakhs only) whereas the defendant has signed chit Agreement with the above chit fund company on 30-11-2015 agreeing to pay chit installments @ Rs.6000/- every month for the period of 50 months regularly, the above chit was commenced with effect from 30-11- 2013 and to be terminated on 4-1-2018, the defendant participated in the above chit auction held on 3-4-2014 and became successful bidder having agreed to forego amount of Rs.1,03,500/- (Rupees one lakh three thousand five hundred only) out of the total chit value of Rs.3,00,000/- and inorder to draw the prize amount, the defendant had to furnished the guarantors, that the plaintiff being the government employee and out of acquaintance with the defendant on 30-6-2014 stood as guarantors along with others by name V.Ravibabu, who is the husband of the

OS.486/21 Dt: 31.3.2022

2 defendant, J.Ramu, D.Siva Ramakrishna prasad and Ch.Jayasing Raju also stood as guarantors for the due payment of future installments and the defendant has received the entire prize money of Rs.1,99,750/- vide cheque no.322282., thereafter the defendant made the payment up to 29 installments and the defendant became defaulter in payment of month subscriptions, thereafter the above chit company sent the legal notices to the plaintiff and the defendant and requested for payment of the default amount, the plaintiff making reminders to the plaintiff regularly, but the defendant did not heed the words of the plaintiff, the plaintiff is an employee government teacher, the plaintiff has good reputation in the society, the plaintiff made the remainders for payment of the installments of the default amount to the defendant as and when, but the defendant have been putting the matter on and off, thereafter the chit fund authorities have filed the claim dispute no.194/2017 before the Deputy

Registrar of Chits and District Registrar at Khammam for claiming pending installment amount, the Deputy Registrar of chits and District Registrar, Khammam has sent the summons to the plaintiff and defendant and to other guarantors, after receiving the summons the plaintiff approached the defendant, the defendant promised the plaintiff that the defendant would clear off the claim amount, but the defendant procrastinate the matter even after the plaintiff requested, finally the Deputy Registrar of chits and

District Registrar passed the award and given the recovery certificate U/sec.71(a) of the chit fund Act 1982, dt:9-8-2018 to the Margardarsi Chits, after receiving the recovery certificate the authorities of the chit fund filed the execution petition on the file of Hon'ble Prl.Jr.Civil Judge at Khammam vide EP No.120/2018 with a prayer to attach the movable property of the plaintiff client. Hence, this suit.

3.The defendant set exparte on dt:22.2.2022.

4.To substantiate the case of plaintiff, the plaintiff himself examined as PW.1 and got marked Ex.A1 to A4.

5.Heard the learned Counsel for plaintiff.

6.Now the point for determination is: Whether the plaintiff is entitled to recover the suit amount from the defendant? POINT:

7.PW.1:M.Srinivas in his chief examination reiterated the contents of plaint.

Exs.A1 to A4 documents were marked. Ex.A1 is Original receipt bearing no.12537 paid by the plaintiff to the chit fund M/s.Margadarsi chit fund (p)limited, Khammam under the chit agreement and EP Amount dt:28-10-2020, ExA2:Office copy of legal notice dt:6.2.2021, ExA3: Postal receipt bearing no.RN266727015N Dt:6.2.2021,

OS.486/21 Dt: 31.3.2022

ExA4: Postal returned cover with an endorsement as no such person by the defendant

dt:8.2.2021.

8.On perusal of Ex.A1 to A4, it shows that the defendant borrowed a sum of Rs 85,000/- (Rupees eighty five thousand only) from the plaintiff and executed a promissory note in favour of plaintiff. Therefore, the plaintiff proved his case. The evidence of PW.1 is unchallenged. The plaintiff is entitled for recovery of the suit amount from the defendant. Accordingly, this point is answered.

9.IN THE RESULT, suit is decreed with costs against the Defendant for a sum of

Rs. 87,000/- (Rupees eighty seven thousand only) and to pass the decree with interest @ 18% per annum for Rs.85,000/- on the interest of Rs.85,000/- from the date of suit till the realization .

Typed to my dictation by the Stenographer, corrected and pronounced by me in the open court, on this the 31st day of March,2022.

FAC V ADDL.JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE,CUM

SPL.JMFC, PROH.&EXCISE CASES,

KHAMMAM

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

WITNESSES EXAMINED

For PlaintiffFor Defendant PW.1:M.Srinivas -None-

EXHIBITS MARKED

For Plaintiff Ex.A1 is Original receipt bearing no.12537 paid by the plaintiff to the chit fund

M/s.Margadarsi chit fund (p)limited, Khammam under the chit agreement and EP

Amount dt:28-10-2020,

ExA2:Office copy of legal notice dt:6.2.2021,

ExA3: Postal receipt bearing no.RN266727015N Dt:6.2.2021,

ExA4: Postal returned cover with an endorsement as no such person by the defendant

dt:8.2.2021.

For Defendant: -Nil- FAC V ADDL.JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE,CUM

SPL.JMFC, PROH.&EXCISE CASES,KHAMMAM

OS.486/21 Dt: 31.3.2022

IN THE COURT OF THE V ADDL.JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE,CUMSPL.JMFC,

PROH.&EXCISE CASES:: AT KHAMMAM

Dated this the 31st day of March,2022.

Present:: Ms.N.V.Hyma Pujitha III Addl.Jr. Civil JUdge, Khammam.

FAC. V ADDL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE -CUM-

PROH AND EXCISE CASES, KHAMAMM

Presented on:26-4-21 Filed on:27-4-21

O.S.No. 486/2021

Between : Maloth Srinivasu, s/o.Bitcha, 45yrs, Government teacher, R/o.Ganesh township, Yellandu road, Khammam town and district.

...Plaintiff.

And

Vemula Mamatha,w/o.Ravi Babu @ Ravi Kumar, 36yrs, Business, C/o.H.no:12-4-672, Road no.12, B.C.Colony , Opp:Church,TNGO, Raparthi Nagar no.2, Mob:9912588822.

...Defendant.

CLAIM FOR: This suit is filed by the plaintiff against the defendant for recovery of money of Rs.87,000/- (Rupees eighty seven thousand only) being the principal, interest and legal notice charges basing on promissory note executed by Defendant infavour of plaintiff with future interest @ 18% per annum on Rs.85,000/- from the date of suit till the date of realization and to award costs of the suit. CAUSE OF ACTION AND TERRITORIAL JURISDICTION:

Cause of action arose on 28-10-2020, 17.2.2021 at Khammam. This court has got pecuniary and territorial jurisdiction to entertain this suit.

VALUATION OF THE SUIT AND COURT FEE:

This suit is valued at Rs. 87,000/- (Rupees eighty seven thousand only)upon which total court fee of Rs. 3186/- is paid U/s.20 of A.P.C.F. and S.V.Act.

DECREE: This suit is coming before me today for hearing in the presence of Sri Syed.Amzad Pasha, Advocates for plaintiff and Defendant remain set exparte; upon perusing the material papers on record, upon hearing; this Court doth order and decree:

1. That the suit be and is hereby decreed with costs.

2. That the Defendant do pay to the Plaintiff a sum of Rs.87000/- (Rupees eighty seven thousand only)with interest @ 18% per annum an amount of Rs.85,000/- from the date of filing of the suit till the date of realization

3. That the defendant do pay a sum of Rs.5579/- to plaintiff towards costs of the suit.

Given under my hand and the seal of the court, on this the 31st day of March, 2022.

FAC V ADDL.JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE,CUM

SPL.JMFC, PROH.&EXCISE CASES,KHAMMAM

OS.486/21 Dt: 31.3.2022

PARTICULARS OF COSTS

FOR PLAINTIFF FOR DEFENDANT

1. Stamps on plaint 3186/-E

2. Stamps on power 2/- X

3. Stamps on process 36/-P

4. Stamps on petitions -- A

5. Publication charges-R

6. Stamps on documents --T

7. Advocate fee 2155/-E

8. Misc. & type charges 200/- ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Total Rs.5579/- -- -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

FAC V ADDL.JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE,CUM

SPL.JMFC, PROH.&EXCISE CASES,

KHAMMAM

IN THE COURT OF THE PRINCIPAL JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE : KHAMMAM

Present: Smt D.Madhavi Krishna, I Addl. Junior Civil Judge, FAC-Prl. Junior Civil Judge, Khammam.

Dated this the 16th day of March, 2016

O.S.No. 388 of 2015

Between : Vunnam Purnachander Rao, S/o Venkateswara Rao, Age: 43 Yrs, occ: Business, R/o H.No: 4-140/3/4, Banapuram village, Mudigonda Mandal, Khammam District.

...Plaintiff.

And

Nelluri Hanumantha Rao, S/o Seethaiah, Age: 48 yrs, Occ: Agrl., R/o H.No: 4-136/1, Banapuram village, Mudigonda Mandal, Khammam District.

...Defendant.

This suit is coming before me today for hearing in the presence of Sri Mamidi Hanumantha Rao, Advocate for plaintiff and Defendant remained exparte; upon perusing the material papers on record, upon hearing; this Court passed the following :

J U D G M E N T

1.This is a suit filed for recovery of Rs. 1,44,756/- (Rupees One lakh Forty four thousand seven hundred and fifty six only ) with costs and interest basing on promissory note.

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

That, out of acquaintance, the defendant borrowed an amount of Rs.84,000/- (Rupees Eighty four thousand only) from the plaintiff on 05-09-2012 for his agricultural necessities and executed a promissory note in favour of plaintiff promising to repay the same with interest @ 24% p.a., either to the plaintiff or to his order on demand.

Thereafter, the plaintiff made several demands on the defendant for repayment of the promissory note amount with interest including legal notice dated 27-08-2015, but the defendant did not choose to repay the promissory note amount. There is no response from the Defendant deliberately though knowing the demand made by the plaintiff to pay the above said amount. Hence, this suit.

3.The defendant set exparte.

4.To substantiate the case of plaintiff, the plaintiff himself examined as PW.1 and got marked Exs.A1 to A4.

5.Heard the learned Counsel for plaintiff.

6.Now the point for determination is:

Whether the plaintiff is entitled to recover the suit amount from the defendant?

POINT:

7.PW.1: Vunnam Purnchander Rao, in his chief examination reiterated the contents of plaint. Exs.A1 to A4 documents were marked. Ex.A1 is Original promissory note, dated 05-09-2012 for Rs.84,000/-. Ex.A2 is Office copy of legal notice dated 27- 08-2015. Ex.A.3 is postal receipt bearing No. RN 639744213. Ex.A4 is Postal acknowledgment.

8.On perusal of Ex.A1, it shows that the defendant borrowed a sum of Rs.84,000/- (Rupees Eighty four thousand only) from the plaintiff and executed a promissory note in favour of plaintiff. Ex.A2, it shows that, the plaintiff got issued legal notice to the defendant calling upon him to repay pronote amount with interest, under Ex.A3 receipt. Ex.A.4, it shows that serving of legal notice under Ex.A.2 to Defendant.

Therefore, the plaintiff proved his case. The evidence of PW.1 is unchallenged. The plaintiff is entitled for recovery of the suit amount from the defendant. Accordingly, this point is answered.

9.IN THE RESULT, suit is decreed against the Defendant for a sum of Rs.

1,44,756/- (Rupees One lakh Forty four thousand seven hundred and fifty six only) with costs and interest @ 12% per annum from the date of filing of the suit till the date of decree and thereafter @ 6% per annum till the date of realization on Rs.84,000/- (Rupees Eighty four thousand only),

Typed to my dictation by the Stenographer, corrected and pronounced by me in the open court, on this the 16th day of March, 2016.

FAC-PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE,

KHAMMAM.

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

WITNESSES EXAMINED

For PlaintiffFor Defendant PW.1:V.Purnachander Rao -None-

EXHIBITS MARKED

For Plaintiff Ex.A1 is Original promissory note, dated 05-09-2012 for Rs.84,000/-. Ex.A2 is Office copy of legal notice dated 27-08-2015 Ex.A3 is postal receipt Ex.A4 is postal acknowledgment

For Defendant -Nil-

FAC-PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE,

KHAMMAM.

IN THE COURT OF THE PRINCIPAL JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE : KHAMMAM

Present: Smt. B.Aparna Devi, Prl. Junior Civil Judge, Khammam.

Dated this the 22nd day of November, 2017.

O.S.No. 135 of 2017

Presented on : 18-03-2017 Filed on : 31-03-2017 Between :

Boina Balram, S/o Laxmaiah, Age: 45 Yrs, Occ: Agrl., R/o H.No: 2-100/2, Raigudem village, Nelakondapalli mandal, Khammam District.

...Plaintiff

And

Reddeboina Brahmam, S/o Venkati, Age: 45 Yrs, occ: Agrl., R/o Rice Mill street, Dorakunta village, Kodad mandal, Suryapet District.

...Defendant

CLAIM FOR:

This suit is filed for recovery of Rs. 35,400/- with future interest @ 24% per annum from the date of suit till the date of realization and to award costs of the suit.

CAUSE OF ACTION AND TERRITORIAL JURISDICTION: Cause of action arose at Raigudem village, nelakondappali mandal, Khammam District on 08-08-2016 when the Defendant borrowed amount and executed promissory note and on 13-02-2017 when the Plaintiff got issued legal notice.

VALUATION OF THE SUIT AND COURT FEE:

This suit is valued at Rs. 35,400/--, upon which a court fee of Rs. 1966/- is paid U/s.20 of A.P.C.F. and S.V.Act.

DECREE: This suit is coming up before me on 08-11-2017 for hearing in the presence of Sri. Ch.Venkat, the learned counsel for the plaintiff and Defendant having being remained exparte and upon perusing the material papers on record and stood over for consideration till this day, ; this court doth order and decree:

1.That the suit be and is hereby decreed with costs.

2.That the Defendants do pay to the Plaintiff a sum of Rs. 35,400/- with future interest @ 12% per annum from the date of suit till the date of decree and thereafter @ 6% p.a. till realization.

3.That the Defendant do also pay to the Plaintiff a sum of Rs. towards the costs of the suit.

Given under my hand and the seal of the court, on this the 22nd day of November, 2017.

PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE,

KHAMMAM.

//2//

PARTICULARS OF COSTS

FOR PLAINTIFF FOR DEFENDANT

1. Stamps on plaint

2. Stamps on power

3. Stamps on process

4. Stamps on petitions

5. Publication charges

6. Stamps on documents

7. Advocate fee

8. Misc. & type charges ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Total Rs. ------------------------------------------------------------------------

PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE,

KHAMMAM.

OS/580/2020

Cherukuri Rama Rao vs Annepogu Satyam Babu

31 Mar 2022

OS.580/20 Dt: 31.3.2022

IN THE COURT OF THE V ADDL.JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE,CUMSPL.JMFC,

PROH.&EXCISE CASES:: AT KHAMMAM

Dated this the 31st day of March, 2022.

Present:: Ms.N.V.Hyma Pujitha III Addl.Jr. Civil JUdge, Khammam.

FAC. V ADDL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE -CUM-

PROH AND EXCISE CASES, KHAMAMM

O.S.No. 580/2020

Between : Cherukuri Rama Rao, s/o.Hanumantha Rao, 40yrs, business, R/o.CHina Munagala Village, Konijerla mandal, Khammam district.

...Plaintiff.

And

Annepogu Satyam Babu, s/o.Bhushnam, 42yrs, government teacher, High school, Janakipuram village, Bonakal mandal, Khammam district.

...Defendant.

This suit is coming before me today for hearing in the presence of Sri V.S.Chandra Shekar Advocate for plaintiff and Defendant remain set exparte; upon perusing the material papers on record, upon hearing; this Court passed the following :

J U D G M E N T

1.This is a suit filed for recovery of Rs.68,800/- (Rupees sixty eight lakhs eight hundred only ) with costs and interest basing on promissory note.

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

That, out of acquaintance, the defendant borrowed an amount of Rs.40,000/- (Rupees forty lakhs only) from the plaintiff on 2-10-2017 at China Munagala village,

Konijerla mandal, Khammam district from the plaintiff to meet his family necessities and executed a promissory note in favour of plaintiff promising to repay the same with interest @ 24% p.a., either to the plaintiff or to his order on demand. Thereafter, the plaintiff made several demands on the defendant for repayment of the promissory note, but the defendant did not choose to repay the promissory note amount. There is no response from the Defendant deliberately though knowing the demand made by the plaintiff to pay the above said amount. Hence, this suit.

3.The defendant set exparte on dt:31.8.2021.

4.To substantiate the case of plaintiff, the plaintiff himself examined as PW.1 and got marked Ex.A1.

5.Heard the learned Counsel for plaintiff.

OS.580/20 Dt: 31.3.2022

6.Now the point for determination is:

Whether the plaintiff is entitled to recover the suit amount from the defendant? POINT:

7.PW.1: Ch.Ramarao in his chief examination reiterated the contents of plaint.

Exs.A1 document was marked. Ex .A1 is Original promissory note, dated 2.10.17.

8.On perusal of Ex.A1, it sho333333ws that the defendant borrowed a sum of

Rs.40,000/- (Rupees forty thousand only) from the plaintiff and executed a promissory note in favour of plaintiff. Therefore, the plaintiff proved his case. The evidence of

PW.1 is unchallenged. The plaintiff is entitled for recovery of the suit amount from the defendant. Accordingly, this point is answered.

9.IN THE RESULT, suit is decreed against the Defendant for a sum of Rs.

68,800/- (Rupees sixty eight thousand and eight hundred only) with future interest @ 24 % from the date of the suit till the entire realization of the decretal amount with cost.

Typed to my dictation by the Stenographer, corrected and pronounced by me in the open court, on this the 31st day of March 2022.

FAC V ADDL.JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE,CUM

SPL.JMFC, PROH.&EXCISE CASES,

KHAMMAM

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

WITNESSES EXAMINED

For PlaintiffFor Defendant PW.1:Ch.Ramarao -None-

EXHIBITS MARKED

For Plaintiff Ex.A1 is Original promissory note, dated 2.10.17.

For Defendant: -Nil-

FAC V ADDL.JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE,CUM

SPL.JMFC, PROH.&EXCISE CASES,KHAMMAM

OS.580/20 Dt: 31.3.2022

IN THE COURT OF THE V ADDL.JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE,CUMSPL.JMFC,

PROH.&EXCISE CASES:: AT KHAMMAM

Dated this the 31st day of March,2022.

Present:: Ms.N.V.Hyma Pujitha III Addl.Jr. Civil JUdge, Khammam.

FAC. V ADDL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE -CUM-

PROH AND EXCISE CASES, KHAMAMM

Presented on:5.10.2020 Filed on:8.10.2020

O.S.No.580/2020

Between : Cherukuri Rama Rao, s/o.Hanumantha Rao, 40yrs, business, R/o.CHina Munagala Village, Konijerla mandal, Khammam district.

...Plaintiff.

And

Annepogu Satyam Babu, s/o.Bhushnam, 42yrs, government teacher, High school, Janakipuram village, Bonakal mandal, Khammam district.

....defendant

CLAIM FOR: This suit is filed by the plaintiff against the defendant for recovery of money of Rs. 68,800/- (Rupees sixty eight thousand eight hundred only) being the principal, interest and legal notice charges basing on promissory note executed by Defendant infavour of plaintiff with future interest @ 24% per annum from the date of suit till the date of realization and to award costs of the suit.

CAUSE OF ACTION AND TERRITORIAL JURISDICTION:

Cause of action arose on 2-10-17 at Khammam . This court has got pecuniary and territorial jurisdiction to entertain this suit.

VALUATION OF THE SUIT AND COURT FEE:

This suit is valued at Rs. 68,800/-, upon which total court fee of Rs.2836/- is paid U/s.20 of A.P.C.F. and S.V.Act.

DECREE:

This suit is coming before me today for hearing in the presence of Sri V.S.Chandrasekhar Advocate for plaintiff and Defendant remained exparte; upon perusing the material papers on record, upon hearing this court doth order and decree:

1. That the suit be and is hereby decreed with costs.

2. That the Defendant do pay to the Plaintiff a sum of Rs68,800/- (sixty lakhs eighty hundred only ) with interest @ 24% per annum from the date of filing of the suit till the entire realization of the decretal amount.

3. That the defendant do also pay a sum of Rs. 3103/- towards costs of the suit to the plaintiff. Given under my hand and the seal of the court, on this the 31st day of March, 2022.

FAC V ADDL.JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE,CUM

SPL.JMFC, PROH.&EXCISE CASES,KHAMMAM

OS.580/20 Dt: 31.3.2022

PARTICULARS OF COSTS

FOR PLAINTIFF FOR DEFENDANT

1. Stamps on plaint 2836/-E

2. Stamps on power 2/- X

3. Stamps on process 65/-P

4. Stamps on petitions -- A

5. Publication charges-R

6. Stamps on documents --T

7. Advocate fee C.M.not filedE

8. Misc. & type charges 200/- ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Total Rs.3103/- -- -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

FAC V ADDL.JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE,CUM

SPL.JMFC, PROH.&EXCISE CASES,

KHAMMAM

IN THE COURT OF THE PRINCIPAL JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE : KHAMMAM

Present: Smt D.Madhavi Krishna, I Addl. Junior Civil Judge, FAC-Prl. Junior Civil Judge, Khammam.

Dated this the 16th day of March, 2016

O.S.No. 388 of 2015

Between : Vunnam Purnachander Rao, S/o Venkateswara Rao, Age: 43 Yrs, occ: Business, R/o H.No: 4-140/3/4, Banapuram village, Mudigonda Mandal, Khammam District.

...Plaintiff.

And

Nelluri Hanumantha Rao, S/o Seethaiah, Age: 48 yrs, Occ: Agrl., R/o H.No: 4-136/1, Banapuram village, Mudigonda Mandal, Khammam District.

...Defendant.

J U D G M E N T

1.This is a suit filed for recovery of Rs. 1,44,756/- (Rupees One lakh Forty four thousand seven hundred and fifty six only ) with costs and interest basing on promissory note.

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

3.The defendant set exparte.

4.To substantiate the case of plaintiff, the plaintiff himself examined as PW.1 and got marked Exs.A1 to A4.

5.Heard the learned Counsel for plaintiff.

6.Now the point for determination is:

Whether the plaintiff is entitled to recover the suit amount from the defendant?

POINT:

Therefore, the plaintiff proved his case. The evidence of PW.1 is unchallenged. The plaintiff is entitled for recovery of the suit amount from the defendant. Accordingly, this point is answered.

9.IN THE RESULT, suit is decreed against the Defendant for a sum of Rs.

Typed to my dictation by the Stenographer, corrected and pronounced by me in the open court, on this the 16th day of March, 2016.

FAC-PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE,

KHAMMAM.

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

WITNESSES EXAMINED

For PlaintiffFor Defendant PW.1:V.Purnachander Rao -None-

EXHIBITS MARKED

For Plaintiff Ex.A1 is Original promissory note, dated 05-09-2012 for Rs.84,000/-. Ex.A2 is Office copy of legal notice dated 27-08-2015 Ex.A3 is postal receipt Ex.A4 is postal acknowledgment

For Defendant -Nil-

FAC-PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE,

KHAMMAM.

IN THE COURT OF THE PRINCIPAL JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE : KHAMMAM

Present: Smt. B.Aparna Devi, Prl. Junior Civil Judge, Khammam.

Dated this the 22nd day of November, 2017.

O.S.No. 135 of 2017

Presented on : 18-03-2017 Filed on : 31-03-2017 Between :

Boina Balram, S/o Laxmaiah, Age: 45 Yrs, Occ: Agrl., R/o H.No: 2-100/2, Raigudem village, Nelakondapalli mandal, Khammam District.

...Plaintiff

And

Reddeboina Brahmam, S/o Venkati, Age: 45 Yrs, occ: Agrl., R/o Rice Mill street, Dorakunta village, Kodad mandal, Suryapet District.

...Defendant

CLAIM FOR:

This suit is filed for recovery of Rs. 35,400/- with future interest @ 24% per annum from the date of suit till the date of realization and to award costs of the suit.

VALUATION OF THE SUIT AND COURT FEE:

This suit is valued at Rs. 35,400/--, upon which a court fee of Rs. 1966/- is paid U/s.20 of A.P.C.F. and S.V.Act.

1.That the suit be and is hereby decreed with costs.

2.That the Defendants do pay to the Plaintiff a sum of Rs. 35,400/- with future interest @ 12% per annum from the date of suit till the date of decree and thereafter @ 6% p.a. till realization.

3.That the Defendant do also pay to the Plaintiff a sum of Rs. towards the costs of the suit.

Given under my hand and the seal of the court, on this the 22nd day of November, 2017.

PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE,

KHAMMAM.

//2//

PARTICULARS OF COSTS

FOR PLAINTIFF FOR DEFENDANT

1. Stamps on plaint

2. Stamps on power

3. Stamps on process

4. Stamps on petitions

5. Publication charges

6. Stamps on documents

7. Advocate fee

8. Misc. & type charges ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Total Rs. ------------------------------------------------------------------------

PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE,

KHAMMAM.

OS/462/2021

Kummari Rajesh vs Seelam Ravi

10 Nov 2021

OS.462/2021 Dt:10.11.2021

IN THE COURT OF THE V ADDL.JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE,CUMSPL.JMFC,

PROH.&EXCISE CASES:: AT KHAMMAM

Dated this the 10th day of November,2021.

Present: Ms.N.V.Hyma Pujitha, FAC V Addl.Junior Civil JudgeCum Spl.JMFC, Proh.&Excise Cases, Khammam

O.S.No. 462/2021

Between : Sri.Kummari Rajesh, s/o.Gurumurthy, 38yrs, auto Mobile job, R/o.H.no:8-3-141/1, Nizampeta, Khammam city and district.

...Plaintiff.

And

Seelam Ravi, s/o.Veeraiah, 45yrs, Granite worker, R/o.H.no:13-5-4, Kaikondayagudem 1st Division, Khammam city and district.

...Defendant.

This suit is coming before me today for hearing in the presence of Sri K.Gopi Advocate for plaintiff and Defendant remain set exparte; upon perusing the material papers on record, upon hearing; this Court passed the following :

J U D G M E N T

1.This is a suit filed for recovery of Rs. 4,92,000/- (Rupees four lakhs ninety two thousand only ) with costs and interest basing on promissory note.

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

That, out of acquaintance, the defendant borrowed an amount of Rs.3,00,000/- (Rupees three lakhs only) from the plaintiff on 10-8-2018 from the plaintiff to meet family necessities and executed a promissory note in favour of plaintiff promising to repay the same with interest @ 24% p.a., either to the plaintiff or to his order on demand. Thereafter, the plaintiff made several demands on the defendant for repayment of the promissory note, but the defendant did not choose to repay the promissory note amount. There is no response from the Defendant deliberately though knowing the demand made by the plaintiff to pay the above said amount.

Hence, this suit.

3.The defendant set exparte on dt:14.9.2021.

4.To substantiate the case of plaintiff, the plaintiff himself examined as PW.1 &

Pw2 and got marked Ex.A1 to A3.

5.Heard the learned Counsel for plaintiff.

OS.462/2021 Dt:10.11.2021

6.Now the point for determination is:

Whether the plaintiff is entitled to recover the suit amount from the defendant? POINT:

7.PW.1: K.Rajesh in his chief examination reiterated the contents of plaint.

Exs.A1to A3 documents were marked. Ex.A1 is Original promissory note dt:10.8.2018 for amount of Rs.3,00,000/-, ExA2 office copy of legal notice dt:10.2.2021, ExA3 is postal receipt dt:11.2.2021.

8.On perusal of Ex.A1 to A3, it shows that the defendant borrowed a sum of

Rs.3,00,000/- (Rupees three lakhs only) from the plaintiff and executed a promissory note in favour of plaintiff. Therefore, the plaintiff proved his case. The evidence of

PW.1 is unchallenged. The plaintiff is entitled for recovery of the suit amount from the defendant. Accordingly, this point is answered.

9.IN THE RESULT, suit is decreed against the Defendant for a sum of Rs.

4,92,000/- (Rupees four lakhs ninety two thousand only) with interest @ 24% per annum from the date of filing of the suit till the date of realization . Hence, the suit is decreed without cost.

Typed to my dictation by the Stenographer, corrected and pronounced by me in the open court, on this the 10th day of November,2021.

FAC V ADDL.JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE,CUM

SPL.JMFC, PROH.&EXCISE CASES,

KHAMMAM

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

WITNESSES EXAMINED

For PlaintiffFor Defendant PW.1:K.Rajesh Pw2: L.Nageswar rao -None-

EXHIBITS MARKED

For Plaintiff Ex.A1:s Original promissory note dt:10.8.2018 for amount of Rs.3,00,000/-,

ExA2: Office copy of legal notice dt:10.2.2021,

ExA3: Postal receipt dt:11.2.2021.

For Defendant -Nil- FAC V ADDL.JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE,CUM

SPL.JMFC, PROH.&EXCISE CASES,KHAMMAM

OS.462/2021 Dt:10.11.2021

IN THE COURT OF THE V ADDL.JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE,CUMSPL.JMFC,

PROH.&EXCISE CASES:: AT KHAMMAM

Dated this the 10th day of November,2021

Present: Ms.N.V.Hyma Pujitha FAC. V Addl.Junior Civil JudgeCum Spl.JMFC, Proh.&Excise Cases, Khammam Presented on :22.4.21 Filed on :22.4.21

O.S.No. 462/2021

Between : Sri.Kummari Rajesh, s/o.Gurumurthy, 38yrs, auto Mobile job, R/o.H.no:8-3-141/1, Nizampeta, Khammam city and district.

...Plaintiff.

And

Seelam Ravi, s/o.Veeraiah, 45yrs, Granite worker, R/o.H.no:13-5-4, Kaikondayagudem 1st Division, Khammam city and district.

...Defendant.

CLAIM FOR: This suit is filed by the plaintiff against the defendant for recovery of money of Rs.4,92,000/-(Rupees Four lakhs ninety two thousand only) being the principal, interest and legal notice charges basing on promissory note executed by Defendant infavour of plaintiff with future interest @ 24% per annum from the date of suit till the date of realization and to award costs of the suit.

CAUSE OF ACTION AND TERRITORIAL JURISDICTION:

Cause of action arose on 10-8-2018, 10-2-2021, 12-2-2021 at Nizampeta, Khammam . This court has got pecuniary and territorial jurisdiction to entertain the suit.

VALUATION OF THE SUIT AND COURT FEE:

This suit is valued at Rs. 4,92,000/-, upon which total court fee of Rs. 7426/- is paid U/s.20 of A.P.C.F. and S.V.Act.

DECREE:

This suit is coming before me today for hearing in the presence of Sri.K.Gopi Advocates for plaintiff and Defendant remained exparte; upon perusing the material papers on record, upon hearing this court doth order and decree:

1. That the suit be and is hereby decreed with out costs.

2. That the Defendant do pay to the Plaintiff a sum of Rs.4,92,,000/- (four lakhs ninety two thousand only ) with interest @ 24% per annum from the date of filing of the suit till the date of realization and without costs.

OS.462/2021 Dt:10.11.2021

Given under my hand and the seal of the court, on this the 10th day of November, 2021.

FAC V ADDL.JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE,CUM

SPL.JMFC, PROH.&EXCISE CASES,KHAMMAM

PARTICULARS OF COSTS

FOR PLAINTIFF FOR DEFENDANT

1. Stamps on plaint 7426/-E

2. Stamps on power 2/- X

3. Stamps on process 64/-P

4. Stamps on petitions - A

5. Publication charges-R

6. Stamps on documents --T

7. Advocate fee Cost memo not filedE

8. Misc. & type charges 200/- ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Total Rs.7692/- -- -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

FACV ADDL.JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE,CUM

SPL.JMFC, PROH.&EXCISE CASES,

KHAMMAM

OS.462/2021 Dt:10.11.2021

IN THE COURT OF THE PRINCIPAL JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE : KHAMMAM

Present: Smt D.Madhavi Krishna, I Addl. Junior Civil Judge, FAC-Prl. Junior Civil Judge, Khammam.

Dated this the 16th day of March, 2016

O.S.No. 388 of 2015

Between : Vunnam Purnachander Rao, S/o Venkateswara Rao, Age: 43 Yrs, occ: Business, R/o H.No: 4-140/3/4, Banapuram village, Mudigonda Mandal, Khammam District.

...Plaintiff.

And

Nelluri Hanumantha Rao, S/o Seethaiah, Age: 48 yrs, Occ: Agrl., R/o H.No: 4-136/1, Banapuram village, Mudigonda Mandal, Khammam District.

...Defendant.

J U D G M E N T

1.This is a suit filed for recovery of Rs. 1,44,756/- (Rupees One lakh Forty four thousand seven hundred and fifty six only ) with costs and interest basing on promissory note.

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

3.The defendant set exparte.

4.To substantiate the case of plaintiff, the plaintiff himself examined as PW.1 and got marked Exs.A1 to A4.

5.Heard the learned Counsel for plaintiff.

6.Now the point for determination is:

Whether the plaintiff is entitled to recover the suit amount from the defendant?

POINT:

Therefore, the plaintiff proved his case. The evidence of PW.1 is unchallenged. The plaintiff is entitled for recovery of the suit amount from the defendant. Accordingly, this point is answered.

9.IN THE RESULT, suit is decreed against the Defendant for a sum of Rs.

Typed to my dictation by the Stenographer, corrected and pronounced by me in the open court, on this the 16th day of March, 2016.

FAC-PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE,

KHAMMAM.

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

WITNESSES EXAMINED

For PlaintiffFor Defendant PW.1:V.Purnachander Rao -None-

EXHIBITS MARKED

For Plaintiff Ex.A1 is Original promissory note, dated 05-09-2012 for Rs.84,000/-. Ex.A2 is Office copy of legal notice dated 27-08-2015 Ex.A3 is postal receipt Ex.A4 is postal acknowledgment

For Defendant -Nil-

FAC-PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE,

KHAMMAM.

IN THE COURT OF THE PRINCIPAL JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE : KHAMMAM

Present: Smt. B.Aparna Devi, Prl. Junior Civil Judge, Khammam.

Dated this the 22nd day of November, 2017.

O.S.No. 135 of 2017

Presented on : 18-03-2017 Filed on : 31-03-2017 Between :

Boina Balram, S/o Laxmaiah, Age: 45 Yrs, Occ: Agrl., R/o H.No: 2-100/2, Raigudem village, Nelakondapalli mandal, Khammam District.

...Plaintiff

And

Reddeboina Brahmam, S/o Venkati, Age: 45 Yrs, occ: Agrl., R/o Rice Mill street, Dorakunta village, Kodad mandal, Suryapet District.

...Defendant

CLAIM FOR:

This suit is filed for recovery of Rs. 35,400/- with future interest @ 24% per annum from the date of suit till the date of realization and to award costs of the suit.

VALUATION OF THE SUIT AND COURT FEE:

This suit is valued at Rs. 35,400/--, upon which a court fee of Rs. 1966/- is paid U/s.20 of A.P.C.F. and S.V.Act.

1.That the suit be and is hereby decreed with costs.

2.That the Defendants do pay to the Plaintiff a sum of Rs. 35,400/- with future interest @ 12% per annum from the date of suit till the date of decree and thereafter @ 6% p.a. till realization.

3.That the Defendant do also pay to the Plaintiff a sum of Rs. towards the costs of the suit.

Given under my hand and the seal of the court, on this the 22nd day of November, 2017.

PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE,

KHAMMAM.

//2//

PARTICULARS OF COSTS

FOR PLAINTIFF FOR DEFENDANT

1. Stamps on plaint

2. Stamps on power

3. Stamps on process

4. Stamps on petitions

5. Publication charges

6. Stamps on documents

7. Advocate fee

8. Misc. & type charges ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Total Rs. ------------------------------------------------------------------------

PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE,

KHAMMAM.

OS/75/2022

Nimshakavi Ramu vs Rayapudi Seethamahalaxmi

31 Mar 2022

O.S75/22

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

PROH & EXCISE COURT,KHAMMAM.

Dated this the 31st day of March, 2022. Present: Ms.N.V.Hyma PUJITHA, FAC V. Addl.Junior Civil Judge-cum Proh & Excise Court, Khammam.

O.S.NO.75/2022

Between: Nimshakavi Ramu, s/o.Narasaiah, 44yrs, Business, R/o.H.no:5-3-443/2, Pakabanda Bazar, Khammam town and district.

... Plaintiff.

And

Rayapudi Seethamahalaxmi, w/o.Late Nageshwara rao, 78yrs, Household, R/o.H.no:6-2-114/1, Near Century School, Khammam town and district.

...Defendant

This is a suit came before me on 29-3-22 for final hearing in the presence of Sri Sd.Amzad Pasha Advocate for the plaintiff and defendant remained set ex parte, upon perusing the material papers on record, stood over for consideration, till this day, this court delivered the following:

:J U D G M E N T:

This is a suit filed for the relief to direct the defendants to execute a regular registered sale deed in favour of the plaintiff in respect of suit schedule property, in the interest of justice.

2.The facts of the plaint are follows as hereunder:

That the plaintiff and defendant are well known to each other thereby the defendant had offered to sell the house bearing no.5-3-76 and 5-3-77 to an extent of 184sq.yards vide registered sale deed bearing no.2114/1995 on the file of Joint

Sub-Registrar-II, Khammam situated at Pakabanda Bazar, Khammam town and district for a consideration of Rs.2,01,116/-(Rupees two lakhs one thousand one hundred and sixteen only) .The plaintiff accepted the same and paid an amount of

Rs.2,01,116/- on 1-10-2004 to the defendant, the same was received by the defendant and executed an agreement of sale in favour of the plaintiff on the very same day i.e 1-10-2004 and had agreed to execute the registered sale deed as and when demanded by the plaintiff and the defendant deliver the possession to

O.S75/22

the plaintiff on the same day i.e 1-10-2004. Thereafter, the plaintiff demanded the defendant many a times to come forward to execute a regular sale deed. But the defendant had postponed on pretext or the other. The Plaintiff finally met the defendant, but the defendant had not come forward to execute the same. Hence, this suit against the defendant.

3.The defendant having received summons from the court, failed to appear

before the court, as such, the Defendant was set ex-parte.

4.In order to establish the suit claim against the defendant, the plaintiff himself examined as Pw.1 and got marked Ex.A.1 & A2.

5.Heard the learned counsel for the plaintiff and perused the documents filed in support of the suit claim.

6. The point for consideration is:

1. Whether the plaintiff is entitled for the reliefs as prayed for ? and

2. If so, what relief ?

7.POINT No.1:

i)The case of the Plaintiff is that he purchased the suit schedule property from the Defendants under Ex.A.1 CC of registered sale deed bearing no.2114/1995 on the file of joint Sub-Registrar Office, Khammam, ExA2:Encumbrance certificate .

After receiving entire sale consideration, the defendant executed Ex.A.1 and agreed to register the sale deed, as and when the Plaintiff demanded the

Defendant to execute the registered deed, but the defendant had failed to discharge his part of the contract, though he received the entire sale consideration from the plaintiff.

ii).As per the contents of the plaint and evidence of Pw.1, the defendant had failed to perform his part of contract in executing regular registered sale deed though the defendant has demanded several times inspite of receiving total sale consideration amount. As such the plaintiff left with no other alternative approached this court and filed this suit against the defendant with a prayer to direct the Defendant to execute sale deed in his favour. The unchallenged

O.S75/22

contents of the documents and the oral evidence of the plaintiff and conduct of the defendant would reflect that the defendant intentionally avoiding to execute the regular register sale deed infavour of the plaintiff. Thereby, the Defendant failed to perform his duty as promised by him that whenever Plaintiff demanded, he shall execute registered sale deed in favour of Plaintiff. But as he failed to do so, the option left to the Plaintiff is to get the document executed through the due process of law.

iii).Having considering the contents of the plaint, evidence affidavit and Ex.A.1 &A2 as testimony of Pw.1 is supported by Ex.A.1 which remained unchallenged and as there is no other material on record to disbelieve the version of the plaintiff, this court is of the view that the plaintiff is entitled to the relief as prayed in the suit against the defendant. Accordingly, the point is answered in favour of the plaintiff.

IN THE RESULT, the suit of the plaintiff is decreed with costs directing the defendant to execute regular registered sale deed in favour of the plaintiff, within (3) months from the date of this judgment, for the suit schedule property. Failing which, the plaintiff is at liberty to follow the due process of law.

Typed to my Dictation by the Personal Assistant, corrected and pronounced by me in the open court, today, this the 31st day of March 2022 under the hand and seal of this court.

FAC V ADDL JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE-CUM

PROH AND EXCISE COURT, KHAMMAM.

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE-

WITNESSES EXAMINED

For PLAINTIFF: For Defendants: None PW.1:N.Ramu

EXHIBITS MARKED FOR

Plaintiff: Defendants: Nil. Ex.A.1 CC of registered sale deed bearing no.2114/1995 on the file of joint Sub-Registrar Office, Khammam, ExA2:Encumbrance certificate

FAC V ADDL JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE-CUM

PROH AND EXCISE COURT, KHAMMAM

O.S75/22

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

PROH & EXCISE COURT,KHAMMAM.

Dated this the 31st day of March, 2022. present: Ms.N.V.Hyma PUJITHA, FAC. V. Addl.Junior Civil Judge-cum Proh & Excise Court, Khammam.

O.S.NO.75/2022

Presented on:27-1-22 Filed on:28-1-22 Between: Nimshakavi Ramu, s/o.Narasaiah, 44yrs, Business, R/o.H.no:5-3-443/2, Pakabanda Bazar, Khammam town and district.

... Plaintiff.

And

Rayapudi Seethamahalaxmi, w/o.Late Nageshwara rao, 78yrs, Household, R/o.H.no:6-2-114/1, Near Century School, Khammam town and district.

...Defendant

CLAIM FOR: This suit is filed to direct the Defendant to execute a valid registered sale deed in favour of the Plaintiff in respect of the suit schedule property failing which the court may execute a registered sale deed on behalf of the Defendant through process of court and to award costs of the suit.

CAUSE OF ACTION AND TERRITORIAL JURISDICTION: Cause of action arose on 1-10-2004 when the Defendant executed agreement of sale, when the Plaintiff requested the Defendant to execute registered sale deed and cause of action arose at Pakabanda bazar, Khammam town and Khammam District. This court is having pecuniary and territorial jurisdiction to entertain the suit.

VALUATION OF THE SUIT AND COURT FEE: The suit is valued at Rs. 42,01,116/- on which a court fee of Rs. 4526/- is paid U/Sec.39(a) of APCF and SV Act.

DECREE: This is a suit came before me on 29-3-22 for final hearing in the presence of Sri Sd.Amzad Pasha Advocate for the plaintiff and defendant remained set ex parte, upon perusing the material papers on record, stood over for consideration, till this day,, this court doth order and decree:

1That the suit be and is hereby decreed with costs. 2That the defendant be and is hereby directed to execute regular registered sale deed in favour of the Plaintiff within three (3) months from the date of this judgment, for the suit schedule property, failing which, the Plaintiff is at liberty to get it execute the same through the process of law. 3That the Defendant do pay a sum of Rs.9730/- to the Plaintiff towards costs of the suit.

O.S75/22

Given under my hand and the seal of the court, on this the 31st day of March, 2022.

FACV ADDL JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE-CUM

PROH AND EXCISE COURT, KHAMMAM

PARTICULARS OF COSTS

FOR PLAINTIFF FOR DEFENDANTS

1. Stamps on plaint 4526/-E

2. Stamps on power 2/- x

3. Stamps on process 2/-p

4. Stamps on petitions -- a

5. Publication charges --r

6. Stamps on documents -- t

7. Advocate fee 5000/-e

8. Misc. & type charges 200/- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Total Rs. 9730/- --- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

FAC V ADDL JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE-CUM

PROH AND EXCISE COURT, KHAMMAM

SUIT SCHEDULE PROPERTY

The house bearing Municipal No.5-3-76 and 5-3-77 to an extent of 184sq.yards vide registered sale deed bearing no.2114/1995 on the file of the Joint Sub registrar-II , Khammam situated at Pakabanda Bazar, Khammam town and district , within the following boundaries:

East : Municipal road

West :Others house

North :Municipal road

South:Others house

FACV ADDL JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE-CUM

PROH AND EXCISE COURT, KHAMMAM

OS/81/2022

Gowravarapu Krishna Murthy vs Bussa Ramu

31 Mar 2022

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

COURT, KHAMMAM

Dated this the 31st day of March, 2022.

Present:: Ms.N.V.Hyma Pujitha, III Addl.Jr. Civil Judge, Khammam.

FAC V ADDL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE -CUM-

PROH AND EXCISE CASES, KHAMAMM

OS.No.81/2022

Between:- 1.Gowravarapu Krishna Murthy, s/o.Ramaiah, 56yrs, Business, R/o.H.no:4-7-202/8/A/1, Prakash nagar, Khammam,Khammam rural, Khammam district.

2. Gowaravarapu Rama Rao, s/o.Krishna Murthy, 33yrs, employee, R/o.H.no:4-7-202/8/A/1, Prakash nagar, Khammam,Khammam rural, Khammam district.

3. Mylavarap Rajani, D/o.Krishna Murthy, w/o.Vasantha Rao, 35yrs, Housewife,R/o.H.no:4-7-26, Prakashnagar, Khammam urban, Khammam district.

4. Pasumarthi Nagamani, D/o.Krishnamurthy,w/o.Satyanarayana,34yrs, Housewife, R/o.H.no:4-74,. Gollagudem road, Thallada, Khammam district.

…….Plaintiffs

And

(i). Bussa Ramu,S/o.Rama, 36yrs, Business, R/o.H.no:4-14, Raghavapuram, Kodumuru,Khammam district.

(ii).To whom so ever it may concern …….Defendants

This suit is coming up before me on 23-3-2022 for final hearing in the presence of Sri P. Sharath and V.Vasavi Kumari Advocate for Plaintiffs and Defendant no.1 and 2 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 suit is filed for declaration.

2. The brief facts of the plaint are that Plaintiff No.1 is the husband of the late Gowaravarapu Aruna and plaintiff no.2 is the son of late Aruna and plaintiff no.3 and 4 are daughters of late Gowaravarapu Aruna, that late

Gowaravarapu Aruna has died due to ill health on 19-3-2021 at Khammam leaving behind the legal heirs who are the plaintiffs. After all the plaintiffs are came to plaintiffs no.1 house at Khammam on the eve of Sankranthi i.e on 2 14.1.2022, at that time some other relatives along with defendant came to the house of the plaintiff no.1 and this defendant no.1 started quarreling with plaintiffs by stating that this defendant no.1 is also a legal heirs of deceased

Gowpavarapu Aruna who is the wife of the plaintiff no.1 and mother of the plaintiff no.2 to 4 by using filthy language. By that these plaintiffs got lot of mental agony. Plaintiff no.1 and 2 have approached the Tahsildar, Khammam urban mandal, Khammam district on 17-1-2022 for obtaining legal heir certificate. But the Tahsildar has refused to issue the legal heir certificate.

Hence, this suit is filed for seeking issuance of Legal Heir Certificate, by declaring the plaintiffs are the legal heir of late Gowaravarapu Aruna. Hence, this suit.

3. The defendant No .2 is to whom so ever it may concern. D1 and D2 called absent. Hence, D1 and D2 set exparte.

4. During the course of plaintiff's evidence, plaintiff is examined as

P.W.1. He got marked Ex.A.1 to Ex.A2 documents. P.W.1 re-iterated the contents of plaint. Ex.A.1: Original death certificate of wife of the plaintiff issued by Mee seva Khammam town, Khammam dt:19.3.2022, ExA2 : Xerox copy of aadhar card of plaintiff no.1 to 4 (compared with original). Therefore, the evidence of P.W.1 coupled with Ex.A.1 & Ex.A2 established the case of plaintiff. Hence, the plaintiffs are entitled for relief.

5. IN THE RESULT, the suit is decreed with costs declaring that the plaintiffs are the legal heirs of late Gowravarapu Aruna was died on 19-3-2021.

Typed to my dictation, corrected and pronounced by me in the open Court on this the 31st day of March, 2022.

FAC V ADDL JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE-CUM

PROH AND EXCISE COURT, KHAMMAM.

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE-

WITNESSES EXAMINED

For PLAINTIFF: For Defendants: None PW.1:G.Krishna murthy

EXHIBITS MARKED FOR

Plaintiff: Defendants: Nil. Ex.A.1: Original death certificate of wife of the plaintiff issued by Mee seva

Khammam town, Khammam dt:19.3.2022

ExA2 : Xerox copy of aadhar card of plaintiff no.1 to 4 (compared with original).

FAC V ADDL JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE-CUM

PROH AND EXCISE COURT, KHAMMAM

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

COURT, KHAMMAM

Dated this the 31st day of March, 2022.

Present:: Ms.N.V.Hyma Pujitha, III Addl.Jr. Civil Judge, Khammam.

FAC V ADDL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE -CUM-

PROH AND EXCISE CASES, KHAMAMM

OS.No.81/2022

Presented on: 29-1-2022 Filed on:31-1-2022 Between:- 1.Gowravarapu Krishna Murthy, s/o.Ramaiah, 56yrs, Business, R/o.H.no:4-7-202/8/A/1, Prakash nagar, Khammam,Khammam rural, Khammam district.

2. Gowravarapu Rama Rao, s/o.Krishna Murthy, 33yrs, employee, R/o.H.no:4-7-202/8/A/1, Prakash nagar, Khammam,Khammam rural, Khammam district.

3. Mylavarap Rajani, D/o.Krishna Murthy, w/o.Vasantha Rao, 35yrs, Housewife,R/o.H.no:4-7-26, Prakashnagar, Khammam urban, Khammam district.

4. Pasumarthi Nagamani, D/o.Krishnamurthy,w/o.Satyanarayana,34yrs, Housewife, R/o.H.no:4-74,. Gollagudem road, Thallada, Khammam district.

…….Plaintiffs

And

(i). Bussa Ramu,S/o.Rama, 36yrs, Business, R/o.H.no:4-14, Raghavapuram, Kodumuru,Khammam district.

(ii).To whom so ever it may concern

CLAIM FOR: This suit is filed for declaration to declare the plaintiffs as legal heirs and successors of the deceased by name G.Aruna who died on 19.3.2021 at Khammam. CAUSE OF ACTION AND TERRITORIAL JURISDICTION: Cause of action arose at Khammam on 19-3-21 and 14-1-22 and is continuing one. The court is having pecuniary and territorial jurisdiction to entertain the suit.

VALUATION OF THE SUIT AND COURT FEE: This suit is notionally valued at Rs.10,000/-, upon which a court fee of Rs 786/- is paid U/s.24 ( d) of A.P.C.F. and S.V.Act.

DECREE: This suit is coming up before me on 23-3-22 for final hearing in the presence of Sri. P.Sharat and V.Vasavi Kumari Advocate for Plaintiff and Defendants remained set exparte; upon perusing the material papers on record having heard and stood over for consideration, this court doth order and decree:

1.That the suit be and is hereby decreed with costs.

2.That the plaintiffs be and are hereby declared legal heirs of Late Gowravarapu Aruna who died on 19-3-2021.

3.That the defendants do pay a sum of Rs.1958/-- to plaintiffs towards costs of suit.

Typed to my dictation, corrected and pronounced by me in the open Court on this the 31st day of March, 2022.

FAC V ADDL JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE-CUM

PROH AND EXCISE COURT, KHAMMAM.

PARTICULARS OF COSTS

FOR PLAINTIFFS FOR DEFENDANT

1. Stamps on plaint786/-E

2. Stamps on power 2/-X

3. Stamps on process 70/-P

4. Stamps on petitions -A

5. Publication charges 1000/-R

6. Stamps on documents --T

7. Advocate fee Cost memo not filed -

8. Misc. & type charges 100/- E --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Total Rs. 1958/- - --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ` FAC V ADDL JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE-CUM

PROH AND EXCISE COURT, KHAMMAM.

Order Record 1,433 total

Case No.	Parties	Date	Type	Outcome
CC/327/2021	Agala Sai Kumar vs Kondapalli Rajesh	01 May 2023	Order	Acquitted
CC/72/2023	STATE OF TELANGANASTATE OF TELANGANA, PS CHINTHAKANI vs Kambam Satyanarayana	29 Apr 2023	Order	Convicted
OS/182/2023	Chithari Samatha @ Namepalli Samatha vs The Tahsildar, Khammam Urban Mandal, Khammam District.	28 Apr 2023	Judgement	—
OS/1279/2021	Perika Umashankar vs Veramalla Vijaya Mohan	28 Apr 2023	Judgement	—
OS/1574/2022	Budigam Saritha vs Vemareddy Pushpavathi	28 Apr 2023	Judgement	—
OS/1717/2022	Nukarapu Venkateswarlu vs Tatikonda Srinivasa Rao	28 Apr 2023	Judgement	—
CC/400423/2016	shaik saidulu vs Vspandi veeranna	28 Apr 2023	Order	—
EP/100064/2018	M/s.Srinivasa Traders, rep.by its Prop.Kodumuru Srinivasa Rao vs M/s.Kakatiya Fertilizers, Pesticides and Seeds	27 Apr 2023	Order	—
EP/100125/2018	Balabhadruni Parvathi Devi vs Challa Upender	27 Apr 2023	Order	—
EP/100194/2015	Kapil Chit -Kosta Pvt. Ltd, Gandhi Chowk Branch vs Dharnasi Satyavathi and 5 others	27 Apr 2023	Order	—
OS/100247/2016	Poosa Narender vs Kethireddy Atchireddy	27 Apr 2023	Judgement	—
CC/828/2023	STATE OF TELANGANA, PS RAGHUNADHAPALEM vs Chapalamadugu Venkateswarlu	27 Apr 2023	Order	Convicted
OS/1392/2022	Gundamala @ Marri Praveena Kumari vs The Tahsildar, Khammam Urban	26 Apr 2023	Judgement	—
OS/100176/2018	Nelluri Narayana Rao vs Pittala Venkateswara Rao	26 Apr 2023	Order	—
CC/797/2023	STATE OF TELANGANA, PS RAGHUNADHAPALEM vs Pagilla Krishna	26 Apr 2023	Order	Convicted
CC/798/2023	STATE OF TELANGANA, PS RAGHUNADHAPALEM vs Gundla Babu Rao	26 Apr 2023	Order	Convicted
CC/289/2019	SHO PS, THIRUMALAYAPALEM vs Vallepureddy Ramulamma and 2 others	25 Apr 2023	Judgement	—
CC/2280/2020	STATE OF TELANGANA vs Vallapuneni Mohan Rao	25 Apr 2023	Judgement	—
CC/4139/2019	STATE OF TELANGANA vs Gamini Venkata Narayana	25 Apr 2023	Order	—
EP/100085/2015	Margadarshi chits khammam branch vs Md.Fasiuddin	24 Apr 2023	Order	—
EP/100249/2016	SHRIRAM CHIT PVT LTD.,Khammam Branch vs Neelam Prameela and four others	24 Apr 2023	Order	—
OS/1628/2022	Guguloath Chandya vs Maloth Ramu	24 Apr 2023	Judgement	—
OS/100116/2018	Elavala Srinivas Reddy vs Elavala Venkata Reddy and one other	24 Apr 2023	Order	—
CC/154/2019	The State Police, Tirumalayapalem police station. vs Tata Satyanarayana and 2 others	24 Apr 2023	Judgement	—
CC/202/2019	The State Police, Tirumalayapalem police station. vs Lanjepalli Gopaiah and 2 others	24 Apr 2023	Judgement	—
CC/273/2022	SI OF POLICE vs Bandaru Venkata Reddy	24 Apr 2023	Judgement	—
CC/292/2019	SHO PS, THIRUMALAYAPALEM vs Chinthirala Naresh and 3 others	24 Apr 2023	Order	—
OS/948/2022	Karlapati Ranga Rao vs Kalakonda Smitha	24 Apr 2023	Order	—
EP/2/2023	Vadde Naresh Kumar vs Surabhi Sudheer	21 Apr 2023	Order	—
OS/292/2022	Degala Upendar vs Seelam Nagamani	21 Apr 2023	Judgement	—
OS/100609/2016	Mundra Rangamma vs Patcha Venkateswarlu and 19 others	21 Apr 2023	Order	—
CC/1228/2021	Apuri Ramesh vs Kusu Srinivasa Rao	21 Apr 2023	Order	—
OS/36/2023	Annarapu Veera Bhadram vs Konam Sunitha	20 Apr 2023	Judgement	—
OS/395/2022	Doule Umashankar vs Morrimekala Kotaiah	20 Apr 2023	Order	—
OS/1204/2022	Podili Srinivasa Rao vs Podili @ Puli Sridevi	20 Apr 2023	Order	—
OS/1228/2022	Kodi Venkanna vs Jala Narasamma	20 Apr 2023	Order	—
CC/1163/2021	PS.Khammam III town vs Banoth Venkanna	20 Apr 2023	Order	—
OS/617/2022	Mondi Ramachandra Rao vs Batchalakuri Bharathi	19 Apr 2023	Order	—
OS/1380/2022	Peramasani Venkataravamma vs Dodda Nagaiah	19 Apr 2023	Judgement	—
CC/355/2019	S.H.O. Tirumalayapalem vs Koppula Sreenu @ Srinivasa Rao	19 Apr 2023	Order	—
CC/632/2020	Guduru Prasad vs Mamillapalli jagadeesh	19 Apr 2023	Order	—
CC/1224/2021	Bendadi Kumar vs D.Tirupathi Rao	19 Apr 2023	Order	—
EP/100091/2014	M.SREENIVASA RAO vs K.RAMESH AND OTHERS	18 Apr 2023	Order	—
OS/42/2019	Banoth Balu vs Halavath Devendar	18 Apr 2023	Order	—
OS/114/2019	Andhra Pradesh Grameen Vikas Bank vs Sirikonda Venkata Narayana and another	18 Apr 2023	Order	—
STC.NI/151/2022	Sirra Nagaiah vs Bandarupalli Damayanthi	18 Apr 2023	Order	—
OS/969/2022	Halavath Pentamma vs Halavath Pullaiah	17 Apr 2023	Order	—
CC/478/2021	M/s Shriram Transport Finance Company Ltd., Khammam, rep. by its GPA Holder Gajula Amarnadh vs Pandilla Rama Krishna	17 Apr 2023	Order	—
CC/2829/2021	P.S. Konijerla vs Bhukya Shiva	15 Apr 2023	Order	—
CC/3041/2021	PS Konijerla vs Bhukya.Krishna	15 Apr 2023	Order	—
EP/100111/2017	Vaddeboina Rama Murthy vs Smt.Gudipati Guna Sundari and others	13 Apr 2023	Order	—
CC/1533/2021	SI OF POLICE TIRUMALAYAPALEM vs Gade Surender Reddy	13 Apr 2023	Judgement	—
CC/2271/2019	Anota Venkata Swamy vs B.Venkateswarlu	13 Apr 2023	Order	—
EP/100070/2017	Shaik Shilar Bee vs Challa Veeramma	12 Apr 2023	Order	—
OS/129/2019	Syndicate Bank Khammam vs M.D Amzad Khan	12 Apr 2023	Order	—
OS/100484/2018	Vakadani Ramanjaneyulu vs The Commissioner, Khammam Municipal Corporation, Khammam and another	12 Apr 2023	Order	—
OS/100743/2018	Dama Narayana Rao vs Nama Sridevi	12 Apr 2023	Order	—
CC/610/2023	STATE OF TELANGANA, PS CHINTHAKANI vs Bondekolla Saidulu	12 Apr 2023	Order	—
CC/401242/2017	sho ps 3 twon kmm vs Vsallam suresh	12 Apr 2023	Order	—
EP/120/2019	Kapil Chits funds rep.by CH.Prashanth vs Palle Prasad Babu	11 Apr 2023	Order	—
OS/1093/2022	Yasa Vijayalaxmi vs The Tahsildar, Konijerla Mandal, Khammam District.	11 Apr 2023	Judgement	—
CC/150/2021	STATE OF TELANGANA vs Barapatla Janardhan	11 Apr 2023	Order	—
CC/1192/2021	Laxman Bajaj vs Vecha Vijay Kumar	11 Apr 2023	Order	—
OS/686/2020	State Bank of India, rep by its Chief Manager, Aakula Madhava Rao vs Gundi Karuna	11 Apr 2023	Order	—
EP/114/2021	Kapil chits (Kosta) Pvt.Ltd. Gandhichowk, branch vs Kalloji Achaiah	10 Apr 2023	Order	—
CC/337/2023	P.S. Thirumalayapalem vs Kasna Babu Banoth	10 Apr 2023	Order	—
CC/2412/2019	Budigam venakanna vs G.Venkanna	10 Apr 2023	Order	—
CC/3208/2019	D. Srikanth vs Ch. Venkateswarlu	10 Apr 2023	Order	—
STC.NI/10/2022	Musthala Saraswathi vs Kalabathula Shantha Rao	10 Apr 2023	Order	—
EP/17/2021	Shriram Chits Pvt Ltd, Khammam I branch vs Pallapu Srinivasa Rao and others	03 Apr 2023	Order	—
CC/2713/2020	Vempati Venkateswarlu vs Kurnelli Susweswara Rao	03 Apr 2023	Order	—
CC/2764/2020	M/S Shriram City Union Finance Limited, rep. by Syed Asif vs Gunti Ravi Kumar	03 Apr 2023	Order	—
STC.NI/853/2022	Kanakapudi Satish Babu vs Papaganti Praveen Kumar	03 Apr 2023	Order	—
CC/605/2023	STATE OF TELANGANA vs Balagani Madhava Rao	01 Apr 2023	Order	—
EP/100322/2014	MS MARGADARSHI CHIT FUND vs B Gurumurthy	31 Jan 2023	Order	—
OS/80/2020	Valasala Rama Krishna Rao vs Chinthala Rajesh	31 Jan 2023	Order	—
OS/866/2022	Islavath Venkanna vs Jarpula Venkanna	31 Jan 2023	Order	—
OS/1082/2022	Danda Satyanarayana vs Bhukya Suresh	31 Jan 2023	Judgement	—
CC/174/2023	STATE OF TELANGANA vs Ravi Tekumatla	31 Jan 2023	Order	—
CC/2077/2020	Sakani Nagaraju vs Shaik Saidulu Meera	31 Jan 2023	Order	—
CC/3827/2022	PS THIRUMALAYPALEM vs Vinith Govinda @ Babu	31 Jan 2023	Order	—
CC/69/2023	STATE OF TELANGANA, PS CHINTHAKANI vs Shaik Jani Pasha	31 Jan 2023	Order	Convicted
CC/71/2023	STATE OF TELANGANASTATE OF TELANGANA, PS CHINTHAKANI vs Naddi Ramu	31 Jan 2023	Order	Convicted
CC/81/2023	STATE OF TELANGANA vs Shaik Saidulu	31 Jan 2023	Order	Convicted
CC/83/2023	STATE OF TELANGANA vs Matta Chiranjeevi	31 Jan 2023	Order	Convicted
CC/85/2023	STATE OF TELANGANA vs Dandagala Rama Krishna	31 Jan 2023	Order	Convicted
CC/87/2023	STATE OF TELANGANA vs Syed Arif	31 Jan 2023	Order	—
CC/89/2023	STATE OF TELANGANA vs Dandu Ravindranath	31 Jan 2023	Order	—
CC/94/2023	STATE OF TELANGANA vs Boina Mahesh	31 Jan 2023	Order	—
CC/3344/2022	STATE OF TELANGANA vs Potteti Sunil Kumar	31 Jan 2023	Order	—
CC/3366/2022	P.S. Konijerla vs Uppala Ratnakar	31 Jan 2023	Order	—
CC/3471/2022	STATE OF TELANGANASTATE OF TELANGANA, PS KONIJERLA vs Rayapudi Keshavulu	31 Jan 2023	Order	—
CC/3472/2022	STATE OF TELANGANASTATE OF TELANGANA, PS KONIJERLA vs Guguloth Ramakrishna	31 Jan 2023	Order	—
CC/3574/2022	STATE OF TELANGANASTATE OF TELANGANA,PS III TOWN, KHAMMAM vs Ballem Ellaiah	31 Jan 2023	Order	—
CC/3578/2022	STATE OF TELANGANA vs Boda Dev Singh	31 Jan 2023	Order	—
CC/3580/2022	STATE OF TELANGANA vs Vemula Upender	31 Jan 2023	Order	—
CC/3587/2022	STATE OF TELANGANA vs Rayala Shyam Sundar	31 Jan 2023	Order	—
CC/3603/2022	STATE OF TELANGANA vs Danavath Ravi	31 Jan 2023	Order	—
CC/3612/2022	STATE OF TELANGANA vs Shaik Mannan	31 Jan 2023	Order	—
CC/3615/2022	STATE OF TELANGANA vs Injamuri Prakash Rao	31 Jan 2023	Order	—

Showing 100 of 1,433 orders — Log in to browse all pages.

Monthly Orders (Last 12 Months)

May 2023		1
Apr 2023		73
Jan 2023		153
Dec 2022		93
Nov 2022		750
Oct 2022		95
Sep 2022		96
Aug 2022		24
Mar 2022		58
Feb 2022		5
Jan 2022		18
Dec 2021		52

Frequently Asked Questions

How many cases has Nerella Venkata Hyma Pujitha handled?

Nerella Venkata Hyma Pujitha has handled 1443 court orders since 2021 at Khammam, PDJ Court Complex. The average disposal rate is 53 orders per month.

What types of cases does Nerella Venkata Hyma Pujitha hear?

Based on available records, Nerella Venkata Hyma Pujitha primarily handles Criminal matters (Criminal Cases, Summary Trial Cases) and Civil matters (Original Suits, Execution Petitions) at Khammam, PDJ Court Complex.

Where is Nerella Venkata Hyma Pujitha currently posted?

Nerella Venkata Hyma Pujitha is posted as III Additional Junior Civil Judge -cum- III Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Khammam at Khammam, PDJ Court Complex, Khammam, Telangana.

Are judgments by Nerella Venkata Hyma Pujitha available online?

Yes. 30 judgments by Nerella Venkata Hyma Pujitha are available on Legistro with full text, outcome, and sections cited.

How fast does Nerella Venkata Hyma Pujitha dispose cases?

Nerella Venkata Hyma Pujitha disposes approximately 53 cases per month, based on 1443 orders handled over their tenure at Khammam, PDJ Court Complex.

Since when is Nerella Venkata Hyma Pujitha serving?

Nerella Venkata Hyma Pujitha has been serving at Khammam, PDJ Court Complex since 2021.

Case Types

CC 36%

STC 34%

OS 21%

EP 7%

PRC 1%

MC 1%

DVC 1%

Posting History

Mar 2023 — May 2023

III Additional Junior Civil Judge -cum- III Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Khammam · 16 orders
Mar 2023 — May 2023

Principal Junior Civil Judge -cum- Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Khammam · 58 orders
Aug 2022 — Jan 2023

III Additional Junior Civil Judge -cum- III Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Khammam · 699 orders
Aug 2022 — Jan 2023

Principal Junior Civil Judge -cum- Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Khammam · 512 orders
Dec 2021 — Mar 2022

Special Judicial Magistrate of First Class for trial of cases under Telangana Prohibition and Excise Acts cum V Additional Junior Civil Judge, Khammam · 133 orders
Oct 2021 — Nov 2021

Special Judicial Magistrate of First Class for trial of cases under Telangana Prohibition and Excise Acts cum V Additional Junior Civil Judge, Khammam · 25 orders
Jan 2021 — Aug 2022

III Additional Junior Civil Judge -cum- III Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Khammam

Outcomes on Record

Convicted 9

Acquitted 2

Other Judges at this Court

Sri G. Raja Gopal

Prinicpal District and Sessions Judge, Khammam

811 orders

Sri Bakaraju Srinivasa Rao

I Additional District and Sessions Judge, Khammam

84 orders

Vasukala Sreenaiah

II Additional District and Sessions Judge, Khammam

50 orders

Dr. G.v. Mahesh Naath

Judge, Family Court -cum- IV Additional District a...

24 orders

Dr. Pullabhatla Pogada Krishna Arjun

Special Judge for Trial of Cases under SCs and STs...

30 orders

Smt. Bakkera Naga Lakshmi

Special Judicial Magistrate of First Class (Mobile...

2,113 orders

Jyothirmai Kakumani

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

0 orders

Smt. Rajani Bekkam

I Additional Junior Civil Judge -cum- Special Judi...

1,909 orders

Ms.Yepuri Bindu Priya

II Additional Junior Civil Judge -cum- II Addition...

344 orders

Mr. Arava Praveen

III Additional Junior Civil Judge -cum- III Additi...

0 orders

Ms. G.Akhila Goud

Special Judicial Magistrate of First Class for tri...

316 orders

Smt. M. Kalpana

Principal Senior Civil Judge -cum- Assistant Sessi...

744 orders

Smt. V. Shiva Ranjani

I Additional Senior Civil Judge -cum- Additional A...

1,229 orders

T.Murali Mohan

II Additional Senior Civil Judge -cum- Additional...

152 orders

Vasukula Sreenaiah

Court of Special Sessions Judge for fast tracking...

228 orders

← View all judges at Khammam, PDJ Court Complex