Smt.P.Chandana

Junior Civil Judge-cum-XIV Addl. Metropolitan Magistrate, Hayathnagar

Hayathnagar, JCJcumXIV AMM Court Complex · Rangareddy · Telangana

Smt.P.Chandana, Junior Civil Judge-cum-XIV Addl. Metropolitan Magistrate, Hayathnagar, is posted at Hayathnagar, JCJcumXIV AMM Court Complex, Rangareddy, Telangana, India. 305 court orders on record since 2021. 10 judgments with full text available. Primarily handles OS, CC cases.

305

Total Orders

Judgments

Orders/Month

Postings

Featured Judgments

CC/497/2018 Acquitted

P S Hayathnagar vs Jitta Mahipal Reddy

26 Apr 2023

2

CC.No.497/2018 Dt:26.04.2023

IN THE COURT OF THE XIV ADDITIONAL METROPOLITAN

MAGISTRATE CYBERABAD AT HAYATHNAGAR

Present: SMT.P.CHANDANA,

XIV Addl. Metropolitan Magistrate,

Cyberabad at Hayathnagar,R.R.Dist.

This the 26 th day of April, 2023

C.C.No.497 of 2018

(Cr.No.138 of 2017 of Hayathnagar Police Station)

Between:

The state of Telangana through Sub-Inspector of Police Hayathnagar Police Station Represented by Assistant Public Prosecutor ….Complainant

AND

1.Jitta Mahipal Reddy S/o. Anantha Reddy Aged about:47 years, Occ: Business R/o.h.No.12-13-483/25/1, Street No.14, Nagarjunanagar, Taranaka, Hyderabad

This case is coming on 26.04.2023 for Judgment before me, in the presence of Assistant Public Prosecutor for the State, and of Sri K.Surender Reddy, Counsel for the accused and perusing the material available on record, and upon hearing the argument on both side this court delivered the following order:

J U D G E M E N T

1. The Sub-Inspector of police, Hayathnagar Police Station filed charge sheet against accused No.1 to 3 for offence punishable under section 420 of IPC in

Crime No.138 of 2007.

2

CC.No.497/2018 Dt:26.04.2023

2. The brief facts of case prosecution are Lw-5 ( J.Narender Goud)

Inspector of Police Hayathnagar P.S received a report from Lw-1 Baddam

Venkat Reddy on 16.02.2017 on 17:00 hours wherein he stated he had agricultural land with an extent of Acres 1.21 guntas in Sy.No.811/A, due to financial problems he made debit an amount of Rs.7,00,000/-, then he approached one K.Narender Goud, S/o. Narsimha R/o. H.No.2-3-412, plot

No.18, Sai Nagar Colony, Nagole assured that he will arrange loan of such amount of Rs.7,00,000/- from Sri Jitta Mahipal Reddy S/o. Anantha Reddy R/o.

Plot No.6, Indupuri Railway colony, West Maredpally, Secunderbad and both stated that, if he made GPA in their favour then only then only they will give amount, after paying amount they will cancel the GPA document No.9445/2015, but they failed to get cancel of the GPA, due to subsequent harassment he went to Registrar office and he came to know that without his knowledge the said

Mahipal Reddy got sale deed in his favour the same was known to him by seeing Encumbrance Certificate on 03.02.2016 the document vide

No.2344/2016 was executed , later on 09.02.2017 executed another document to Chinthakindi Chakrapani S/o. Rama Krishna, age:53 years, R/o. H.No.12-1- 227, 1st floor Radhakrishna R/o. Radha Krishna Residency , Anand Nagar

Colony, Bandlapani were colluded with each other and cheated him. Further the complainant requested to take necessary action.

3. On perusal of the record, this court has taken cognizance of offence punishable under Section 420 of IPC against accused 1 to 3. During the course of proceedings the Hon’ble High Court vide Criminal Petition 9740/2018 recorded the compromise between the defacto complainant and accused No. 3 as such the case is proceeded against only A1 and A2.

4.Copies of case documents furnished to the accused in compliance of section 207 Cr.P.C.

2

CC.No.497/2018 Dt:26.04.2023

5.Accused was examined U/s. 239 of Criminal Procedure Code by explaining and reading over the contents of the charge sheet for the offence punishable under Sections 420 of IPC in Telugu, for which A1 and A2 denied, charge framed read over and explained to them they pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. Hence, the case was posted for trial.

6.During the course of trial, prosecution has examined PW-1 to

Pw-3 respectively and got exhibited Ex.P1 to Ex.P3.

7.After closure of prosecution evidence, accused was examined

U/s. 313 of Criminal Procedure Code by explaining the incriminating prosecution evidence in question form in Telugu, for which he denied and reported that there is no defence evidence and no documents were marked on his behalf.

8. Heard the arguments of the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor and learned defence counsel. Perused the entire record.

9 Now the Point for determination is : whether the

prosecution is able to establish the guilt of accused for the offence

punishable U/s. 420 of IPC beyond the reasonable doubt?

10. Point: To substantiate the guilt of the accused, prosecution examined Pws -1 to Pw-3 and got marked and Ex.P1 to Ex.P3. The prosecution filed report of Lw-1 ( Baddam Venkat Reddy ) as died hence evidence of Lw-1 ( Baddam Venkat Reddy ) closed. Prosectuion also filed report of Lw-3 ( Vardha Rangaiah Goud) as where abouts not known , hence evidence of Lw-3 closed by this court the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor has given up evidence Lw-5 ( J.Narender Goud) Inspector of police as the Pw-3 supported the case of the prosecution .

2

CC.No.497/2018 Dt:26.04.2023

11.Heard both sides . Perused the record. Coming to the evidence of Pw-1 who is the relatives of defacto complainant stated before the court that he does not know the all accused persons and also he does not know anything about this case and police never examined him. Pw-2 who is another relatives of Lw-1 ( Baddam Venkat Reddy ) also stated before the court as same in the line of Pw-1. The learned Assistant Public Prosecutor cross-examined

Pw-1 and Pw-2 but nothing was established to show that Pw-1 and Pw-2 are intentionally supporting the accused persons. Both the Pw-1 and 2 turned hostile .

12.Pw-3 who is the investigation officer deposed the before court about the registration of this case, examination of witnesses and filing of the charge sheet. During the cross-examination, Pw-3 denied that accused persons no way concerned with this case.

13.In the entire evidence of the prosecution on record, the material witnesses Pw-1 and Pw-2 have not deposed any facts of the case or any incriminating evidence against the accused No.1 and 2 to establish the offence

U/sec.420 of IPC. The material available on record is not sufficient to believe the case of the prosecution . Lw-1 ( Baddam Venkat Reddy ) who is the material witness cum defacto complainant is no more as such only basing on the evidence of Pw-3 who is the formal witness, conviction cannot be based on the accused No.1 & 2. Therefore this court holds that allegations against the accused No.1 and 2 for the offence 420 of IPC are not established beyond all reasonable doubts. Therefore the benefit of doubt is given to the accused No.1 and 2. Accordingly Point is answered against the prosecution.

2

CC.No.497/2018 Dt:26.04.2023

14. In the result this court found the accused No.1 and 2 not guilty for offence U/s.420 of IPC. Accordingly accused No.1 and 2 are acquitted

U/s.255 (1) Cr.P.C, as per the record sureties not furnished hence no order passed regarding surety. Nothing was deposited as case property hence no order passed regarding the same.

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

open court on the 26th day of April, 2023.

XIV ADDL. METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE

CYBERABAD AT HAYATHNAGAR

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

WITNESS EXAMINED

FOR PROSECUTION: FOR DEFENCE: -None- PW1: B.Jagan Mohan PW-2: Sama Srinivas Pw-3 : G.Manamadha Kumar / Sub- Inspector of police

DOCUMENTS MARKED

FOR PROSECUTION: FOR DEFENCE: -Nil- Ex.P1: Section 161 Cr.P.C Statement Ex.P2: Section 161 Cr.P.C Statement Ex.P3: FIR along with Police Report

MATERIAL OBJECTS

FOR PROSECUTION: FOR DEFENCE: -Nil- -Nil-

XIV ADDL. METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE

CYBERABAD AT HAYATHNAGAR

2

CC.No.497/2018 Dt:26.04.2023

C A L E N D A R

IN THE COURT OF THE XIV ADDL. METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE

CYBERABAD AT HAYATHNAGAR, RANGA REDDY DSTRICT

C.C.NO.497/ 2018

1Name of the Complainant:P.S. Hayathnagar 2Name of the Accused:1.Jitta Mahipal Reddy S/o. Anantha Reddy Aged about:47 years, Occ: BusinessR/o.H.No.12-13- 483/25/1, Street No.14, Nagarjunanagar,Taranaka, Hyderabad

2. Koppula Narender S/o. Narsimha , Aged about:31 years, Occ: Business Caste: Goud, R/o. H.No.2-1-25 Upparapally Rajendernagar, Ranga Reddy 3.Chinthakindi Chakrapani S/o. Late Rama Krishna Age:54 years, Occ: Business Caste: Padmashali R/o.H.No.12-1-277,Flat No.102,RadhaKrishna Residency, Anand Nagar Colony, Banglaguda, Nagole, Ranga Reddy District 3 Offence under section :420 of IPC 4Date of offence :16.02.2017. 5Date of complaint :16.02.2017 6Date of Apprehension:02.08.2018 7Date of Commencement of :17.03.2023 trial 8Date of closure of trial :26.04.2023 9Date of Judgment :26.04.2023 10Finding of the Court: In the result this court found the accused No.1 and 2 not guilty for offence U/s.420 of IPC. Accordingly accused No.1 and 2 are acquitted U/s.255 (1) Cr.P.C, as per the record sureties not furnished hence no order passed regarding surety. Nothing was deposited as case property hence no order passed regarding the same.

2

CC.No.497/2018 Dt:26.04.2023

11Reasons for delay in disposal :-- of case

XIV Addl. Metropolitan Magistrate, Cyberabad at Hayathnagar, Copy to: The Hon’ble Metropolitan Sessions Judge Cyberabad, R.R.District at L.B.Nagar.

2

CC.No.497/2018 Dt:26.04.2023

CC/534/2017 Acquitted

Nalla Renuka vs Nalla Jangaiah

08 Mar 2023

CC.No.534/2017 1 Dt:08.03.2023

IN THE COURT OF THE XIV ADDITINOAL METROPOLITAN

MAGISTRATE CYBERABAD AT HAYATHNAGAR

Present: SMT.M.P.CHANDANA,

XIV Addl. Metropolitan Magistrate

at Hayathnagar, Ranga Reddy District

This the 08 th day of March, 2023

C.C.No.534 of 2017

(Cr.No.455 of 2017 of Hayathnagar Police Station)

Between:

The state of Telengana through Sub-Inspector of Police Hayathnagar Police Station Represented by Assistant Public Prosecutor ….Complainant

AND

Nalla Jangaiah S/o. Yadaiah Aged about:42 years, Occ: Labour Caste: SC- Madiga, R/o.H.No.1-23, Pasumamula Village of Abdullapurmet Mandal Ranga Reddy District …Accused

This case is coming on 08.03.2023 for final hearing before me, in the presence of Assistant Public Prosecutor for the State, and of Sri G.Mahathma, Counsel for the accused and on perusing the material available on record, and upon hearing the argument on both side this court delivered the following order:

J U D G E M E N T

1. The Sub-Inspector of police, Hayathnagar Police Station filed charge sheet against accused for the offence under section 354-D.

2. The case of the prosecution is that on 07.06.2017 at 19:00 hours

LW-5 (J.Narender Goud), Inspector of Police received a complaint from Smt. Nalla Renuka W/o. Ashok, in which she stated that her husband has three brothers and they all are residing in same building in individual portions, while so her brother-in-law Nall Jangaiah’s wife passed away one year ago and for last six months he was picking up

CC.No.534/2017 1 Dt:08.03.2023

quarrels with her unnecessarily and harassing her in drunken condition by knocking doors and talking in vulgar and abusive manner, in the absence of her husband, the same was repeated on 06.06.2017 at 18:00 hours. Hence the she requested to take necessary action. The complainant lodged a report. Basing on the said report, Lw-5, ( Sri J.Naredner Goud) Inspector of Police registered a case in Cr.No.455/2017 for the offence U/sec. 354-D of

IPC and Lw-6 (Ch. Yadagiri Raju), Assistant Sub-Inspector of Police took up investigation. During the course of investigation, Lw-5 ( J.Narender ) Inspector of police examined Lw-1 (Smt. Nalla Renuka) at police station and recorded his statement. Issued a notice U/sec.

41-A Cr.P.C to the accused and after completion of investigation, Lw-6

Ch.Yadagiri Raju, Assistant Sub-Inspector of Police filed charge sheet against the accused.

3. On perusal of the record, this court has taken cognizance of offence punishable under Section 354-D against accused.

4.Copies of document furnished to accused No.1 & 2 in compliance of section 207 Cr.P.C.

5.Accused No.1 & 2 were examined U/s. 251 of Criminal

Procedure Code by explaining the substance of accusation for the offence punishable under section 354-D of IPC in Telugu, for which he denied, pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. Hence, the case was posted for trial.

6.During the course of trial, prosecution has examined

PW1 to Pw6 and got exhibited Ex.P1 to Ex.P4.

CC.No.534/2017 1 Dt:08.03.2023

7.After closure of prosecution evidence, accused was examined U/s. 313 of Criminal Procedure Code by explaining the incriminating prosecution evidence in question form in Telugu, for which he denied and reported that there is no defence evidence and no documents were marked on his behalf.

8. Heard arguments of the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor and learned defence counsel. Perused the entire record.

9.Now the Points for determination is whether the

prosecution is able to establish the guilt of accused for the

offences punishable offences 354-D beyond all reasonable

doubt?

10. Point: To prove the guilt of the accused, prosecution, examined Pws- 1 to Pw- 6 and got marked Ex.P1 to P4 . During the trial Pw-1 deposed before the court but Pw-1 could not be cross examined as she died. Therefore the evidence of the Pw-1 is hereby eschieved . Pw-2 is husband of Pw-1, he deposed before the court the accused is hid elder brother, two years ago there was some dispute in their house between accused and Pw-1 at that time he was not present at home his wife filed this case, police not examined him. Pw- 2 further deposed that he does not know the contents of the police report filed by his wife.

11.Pw-3 who is the independent witness deposed before the court that he does not know Pw-1 and Pw-2 and also accused, in the year 2017 one day he was going to his home at about 11:00 AM at that time Pw-1 requested him to support her case and expect this he does not know anything. Pw-3 further deposed that police not examined him and not recorded his statement.

CC.No.534/2017 1 Dt:08.03.2023

12.Pw-2 and Pw-3 turned hostile, the learned Assistant

Public Prosecutor cross examined Pw-2 and Pw-3 but nothing was established to prove that Pw-2 and Pw-3 intentionally supported the accused person. Pw-4 is the women police officer who examined the

Pw-1. Pw-4 deposed the same aspect before the court. Pw-5 and Pw-6 are the investigation officers deposed before the court that on receipt of the written complaint from the Pw-1, a case was registered , apprehension of the accused and filing charge sheet. During the cross-examination by the learned defence counsel Pw-5 and Pw-6 denied that the accused is no away concerned with this case.

13.On perusal of the entire evidence on record, Pw-2 who is the husband of Pw-1 did not support the case of prosecution and turned hostile, the other independent witness i.e., Pw-3 also is not deposed any incriminating evidence against the accused. In the absence of any such evidence, this court cannot believe version of the prosecution . Prosecution utterly failed to prove the guilt of the accused beyond all reasonable doubts for the offence U/sec. 354-D of

IPC . The benefit of doubts is given to the accused person. Therefore accordingly the point is answered against the prosecution and infavour of the accused.

14. In the result this court found the accused not guilty for offence U/Sec. 354-D. Accordingly accused is acquitted, U/s. 248(1)

Cr.P.C. No order passed regarding property as no properly deposed .

Surety bonds of accused shall stands cancelled after the expiry six (6) months.

Partly dictated to Stenographer, transcribed by her corrected and

pronounced by me in the open court on the 08th day of March, 2023.

XIV ADDL. METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE

CYBERABAD AT HAYATHNAGAR

CC.No.534/2017 1 Dt:08.03.2023

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

WITNESS EXAMINED

FOR PROSECUTION: FOR DEFENCE:

-None- PW1:N.Renuka PW2: Ashok PW3: Y. Narsimha PW4: Tahera Begum PW5: J.Narender Goud , (Investigation Officer) PW6: Ch.Yadagiri , ( Investigation Officer)

DOCUMENTS MARKED

FOR PROSECUTION: FOR DEFENCE:

-Nil- Ex.P1: Police Report Ex.P2: Section 161 Cr.P.C. statement of PW-2 Ex.P3: Section 161 Cr.P.C. statement of PW-3 Ex.P4: FIR

MATERIAL OBJECTS

FOR PROSECUTION: FOR DEFENCE:

-Nil- -Nil-

XIV ADDL. METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE

CYBERABAD AT HAYATHNAGAR

CC.No.534/2017 1 Dt:08.03.2023

C A L E N D A R

IN THE COURT OF THE XIV ADDL. METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE

CYBERABAD AT HAYATHNAGAR, RANGA REDDY DSTRICT

C.C.NO.534/ 2017

1Name of the Complainant:P.S. Hayathnagar 2Name of the Accused:Nalla Jangaiah S/o. Yadaiah Aged about:42 years, Occ: Labour Caste:SC-Madiga, R/o.H.No.1-23, PasumamulaVillageof Abdullapurmet Mandal Ranga Reddy District 3 Offence under section : 354-D 4Date of offence :07.06.2017 5Date of complaint :07.06.2017 6Date of Apprehension:21.06.2017 7Date of Commencement of :16.12.2019 trial 8Date of closure of trial :06.03.2023 9Date of Judgment :08.03.2023 10Finding of the Court: In the resultthis court found the accused not guilty for offence U/Sec. 354-

D. Accordingly accused is acquitted, U/s. 248(1) Cr.P.C.

No order passed regarding property as no properly deposed . Surety bonds of accusedshallstands cancelled after the expiry six (6) months.

11Reasons for delay in disposal:--

XIV Addl. Metropolitan Magistrate, Cyberabad at Hayathnagar, Copy to:

The Hon’ble Metropolitan Sessions Judge Cyberabad, R.R.District at L.B.Nagar.

CC.No.534/2017 1 Dt:08.03.2023

CC/1422/2018 Acquitted

PS Abdullapurmet vs Merugu Mallaiah

28 Feb 2023

1

CC.No.1422/2018 Dt:28.02.2023

IN THE COURT OF THE XIV ADDITIONAL METROPOLITAN

MAGISTRATE CYBERABAD AT HAYATHNAGAR

Present: SMT.P.CHANDANA,

XIV Addl. Metropolitan Magistrate,

Cyberabad at Hayathnagar,R.R.Dist.

This the 28 th day of February, 2023

C.C.No.1422 of 2018

(Cr.No.296 of 2018 of Abdullapurmet Police Station)

Between:

The state of Telangana through Sub-Inspector of Police Abdullapurmet Police Station Represented by Assistant Public Prosecutor ….Complainant

AND

Merugu Mallaiah S/o. Papaiah Age:64 years, Occ: Pvt Job R/o. H.No.9-148/1/G2, Maruthi Nagar, Medipalli, Ghatkesar, Medchal District N/o.B-7/207, PTS NTPC, Jyothinagar, Ramagundam , Karimnagar District…Accused

This case is coming on 28.02.2023 for final hearing before me, in the presence of Assistant Public Prosecutor for the State, and of Sri Ch.Ravinder Rao, Counsel for the accused and perusing the material available on record, and upon hearing the argument on both side this court delivered the following order:

J U D G E M E N T

1. The Sub-Inspector of police, Abdullapurmet Police Station filed charge sheet against accused for the offence under section 304-A of IPC.

2

CC.No.1422/2018 Dt:28.02.2023

2. The case of the prosecution is that on 21.09.2018 Inspector of police received received a defacto complaint from the complainant Sri.

Gaddam Kiran S/o. Shankar Narayana, in which he stated that on 20.09.2018 at about 17:10 hours his father in law Sri Meruga Mallaiah Age: 61 years, along with his wife Smt. Merugu Amrutha were proceeding from their home to his younger daughter house at Vanasthalipuram, Hayderabad by their

ALTO car bearing number AP 15 S 5826 and they accessed ORR at

Shameerpet, when they reached ORR exit number 10 at Taramathipet

Village, one unknown driver of Car overtaken their vehicle , at that time his father in law was unable to control his car dashed to divider and over turned, as a result he sustained bleeding head injury and his wife sustained bleeding injuries on her face and chest . Immediately they were shifted to Kamineni hospital where the doctors declared that Smt. Meruga Amrutha was died and his father in law undergoing treatment. Hence , the he requested to take necessary action. The complainant lodged a report. Basing on the said report, LW-11 (M.Muni) Inspector of police registered a case in

Cr.No.296/2018 for the offence U/s.304-A of IPC and took up investigation.

During the course of investigation, LW-12 (V.Saidi Reddy) examined LW-1 (Gaddam Kiran) at police station and recorded his statement investigated the case and issued a notice U/s.41-A Cr.P.C. to the accused and after completion of investigation, LW-12 (V.Saidi Reddy), Sub-Inspector of police filed charge sheet against the accused.

3

CC.No.1422/2018 Dt:28.02.2023

3. On perusal of the record, this court has taken cognizance of offence punishable under Section 304-A of IPC against accused and issued summons to the accused.

4.On the appearance of accused, Copies of document furnished to accused in compliance of section 207 Cr.P.C.

5.Accused was examined U/s. 251 of Criminal Procedure Code by explaining the substance of accusation for the offence punishable under

Sections 304 of IPC in Telugu, for which he denied, pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. Hence, the case was posted for trial.

6.During the course of trial, prosecution has examined PW1 to

PW-5 respectively and got exhibited Ex.P1 to Ex.P6.

7.After closure of prosecution evidence, accused was examined

8. Heard the arguments of the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor and learned defence counsel. Perused the entire record.

4

CC.No.1422/2018 Dt:28.02.2023

9 Now the Point for determination is whether the

prosecution is able to establish the guilt of accused for the offence

punishable U/s. 304-A of IPC beyond the reasonable doubt?

10. Point: To prove the case of the prosecution it examined Pws 1 to PW-5, and got marked and Ex.P1 to P6 . In view of the compromise between both parties the learned APP has given up the evidence of Lw-5 ( Sri. Kalakuntla Ramesh) , LW-6 ( K.Ajay Prasanna) Lw-7) Smt. Sirisilla

Divyalu, Lw-8 ( Jagathi Rajaswamy) Lw-9 ( Dr. Abhijit Subhedar , Medical

Professor,) Lw-10 ( Smt. G.Venkata Srisatya Anusha Asst. Motor Vehicles

Inspector) Lw-11 ( M.Muni) Inspector of Police, Lw-12 ( V.Saidi Reddy Sub

Inspector of Police).

11.On perusal of the evidence on record Pw-1 to Pw-4 are the family members of accused, they deposed before the court that while the accused along with deceased traveling to Hyderabad through ORR the one unknown vehicle dashed to the car of the accused due to which deceased received Severe injuries and died. During the cross-examination Pw-1 denied that he mentioned in the police on report that on unknown vehicle that rash driving over the took the car of accused as such the car of the accused lost control.

12.Pw-2 to Pw-4 also deposed the same version of Pw-1 before the court. In this case the investigation officer failed to collect the direct evidence to prove the rash or negligent act of the accused. In the absence of

5

CC.No.1422/2018 Dt:28.02.2023

direct evidence this court cannot believe version of the prosecution in this case. Therefore prosecution has utterly failed to establish the guilt of accused beyond all reasonable doubts for the offence U/sec. 304-A of IPC .

Therefore benefit of doubt is given to the accused. According the point is answered against the prosecution.

13. In the result this court found the accused not guilty for offence

U/s.304-A of IPC . Accordingly accused is acquitted, U/s. 255(1) Cr.P.C. No order passed regarding case property as nothing was deposited. Surety bonds of accused shall stands cancelled after the expiry of six (6) months.

Partly to Stenographer, transcribed by her corrected and pronounced by me in the open court on the 28th day of February, 2023.

XIV ADDL. METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE

CYBERABAD AT HAYATHNAGAR

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

WITNESS EXAMINED

FOR PROSECUTION: FOR DEFENCE: -None- PW1: G.Kiran PW-2: B.Prasad goud PW-3: M.Shankar PW-4: M.Praveen

6

CC.No.1422/2018 Dt:28.02.2023

DOCUMENTS MARKED

FOR PROSECUTION: FOR DEFENCE: -Nil- Ex.P1: Police Report Ex.P2: Marked portion of Section 161 Cr.P.C. statement of PW-1 Ex.P3: Marking portion of Police Report Ex.P4: Marked portion of Section 161 Cr.P.C. statement of PW-2 Ex.P5: Marked portion of Section 161 Cr.P.C. statement of PW-3 Ex.P6: Marked portion of Section 161 Cr.P.C. statement of PW-4

MATERIAL OBJECTS

FOR PROSECUTION: FOR DEFENCE: -Nil- -Nil-

XIV ADDL. METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE

CYBERABAD AT HAYATHNAGAR

7

CC.No.1422/2018 Dt:28.02.2023

A L E N D A R

IN THE COURT OF THE XIV ADDL. METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE

CYBERABAD AT HAYATHNAGAR, RANGA REDDY DSTRICT

C.C.NO.1422/ 2018

1Name of the Complainant:P.S. Abdullapurmet 2Name of the Accused:Merugu Mallaiah S/o. Papaiah Age:64 years, Occ: Pvt Job R/o. H.No.9-148/1/G2, MaruthiNagar,Medipalli, Ghatkesar, Medchal District N/o.B-7/207,PTSNTPC, Jyothinagar, Ramagundam , Karimnagar District 3 Offence under section : 304-A IPC 4Date of offence :21.09.2018 5Date of complaint :21.09.2018 6Date of Apprehension:09.05.2019 7Date of Commencement of :04.01.2023 trial 8Date of closure of trial :28.02.2023 9Date of Judgment :28.02.2023 10Finding of the Court: In the result this court found the accused not guilty for offence U/s.304-A of IPC . Accordingly accused is acquitted, U/s. 255(1) Cr.P.C. No order passed regarding case property as nothing was deposited. Surety bonds of accused shall stands cancelled after the expiry of six (6) months.

11Reasons for delay in :-- disposal of case

XIV Addl. Metropolitan Magistrate, Cyberabad at Hayathnagar, Copy to:

The Hon’ble Metropolitan Sessions Judge Cyberabad, R.R.District at L.B.Nagar.

8

CC.No.1422/2018 Dt:28.02.2023

OS/637/2021

ANNAPAREDDY SRINIVASA REDDY S/O LATE A NAGI REDDY vs L. BALWANTH REDDY S/O L RAM REDDY AND ALL CONCERNED

05 May 2022

OS No.637/2021 1 of 6 Dt:05.05.2022

IN THE COURT OF THE XXIV ADDL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE

AT HAYATHNAGAR, RANGA REDDY DISTRICT

PRESENT : SMT.P.CHANDANA,

JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE,

HAYATHNAGAR.

DATED THIS, THE 05 TH DAY OF MAY, 2022

O.S.No. 637 of 2021

Between:

1. Annapareddy Srinivasa Reddy S/o. Late A.Nagi Reddy Aged about:47 years, Occ: Business, R/o.H.No.3-8-162, Road No.5 Chandrapuri Mandal, Ranga Reddy District.

2.Smt. Konda Rama Devi D/o. Late A.Nagi Reddy W/o. Shiva Rama Krishna Reddy, Aged about:45 years, Occ: House-wife R/o. H.No.3-55, Tangutur , Thumulur Guntur District.

….Plaintiffs.

AND

1. L.Balwanth Reddy S/o. L.Ram Reddy Aged:65 years, Occ: Retd. Employee R/o.H.No.7-27, Pedda Amberpet Village, Abdullapurmet Mandal, Ranga Reddy District

2. All concerned. ….Defendants.

This suit is coming before me on 05.05.2022 for final orders in the presence of Sri Deekonda Ravinder, Counsel for the plaintiffs and defendant

No.1 called absent no representation defendant No.1 remained exparte.

Paper publication filed for defendant no.2 and defendant no.2 called absent and no representation and having heard and stood over for consideration on perusal of the record, this Court made the following:

OS No.637/2021 2 of 6 Dt:05.05.2022

J U D G M E N T

1. The suit is filed by the plaintiff No.1 & 2 with prayer to declare them as legal heirs of the deceased Late Sri.Annapa Reddy Nagi Reddy, who died intestate on 03.05.2021 2. The averments of the plaint are that the plaintiff No.1 and 2 are the brother and sister, the father of the plaintiffs Annapa Reddy Nagi Reddy died on 03.05.2021, on the same day the mother of the plaintiffs also died intestate on 03.05.2021.

3.It is submitted by plaintiffs that during the life time their father acquired suit schedule “A” property i.e., 1) open land bearing plot No.58, admeasuring 300 Sy. Yards, in Sy.Nos. 64/1, 64/2 and 64/3, situated at Pedda

Amberpet Village Abdullapurmet Mandal, Ranga Reddy District, through

Registered Sale deed bearing document No.7454/2019 dated 09.06.2019 for valuable sale consideration from Sri.Voorkonda Lakshma Reddy and since the date of purchase, the said Annapareddy Nagi Reddy was in peaceful possession and enjoyment of the same, he also acquired the suit schedule “B” property i.e. Land admeasuring Ac.1-00 guntas, in Sy.No.68/AA/1, situated as Dandampally Village and Grampanchayath, Nalgonda Mandal and District through Registered Agreement of Sale cum General Power of

Attorney with possession bearing document No. 14307/2019 dated 05.07.2019 for valuable sale consideration from Smt. D.Kalavathi and since the date of purchase, he was in peaceful possession and enjoyment of the same, and he also acquired the suit schedule “C” property Land admeasuring Ac.0-20 guntas in Sy.No.68/AA/2, Ac.1-23 guntas in

Sy.No.68/AA/1/2, Ac.1-17 guntas in Sy.No.68/E/1, Ac. 4-10 guntas in

OS No.637/2021 3 of 6 Dt:05.05.2022

Sy.No.78/RU/1/1, Ac.0-30 guntas, in Sy.No.100/U/3/1/1/1/1 situated as

Dandampally Village and Grampanchayath, Nalgonda Mandal and District, through Registered Agreement of Sale – cum – General power of Attorney with possession bearing document No.14310/2019 dated 09.07.2019 for valuable sale consideration from Smt. Kondabala Rajya laxmi W/o.

K.Narsimha Rao and since the date of purchase, he was in peaceful possession and enjoyment of the same and the said property.

4.It is further submitted that the plaintiffs have been in peaceful possession in enjoyment of the suit schedule properties. Plaintiffs approached the Revenue Department for family members certificate and got issued family members certificate. The plaintiffs are intending to sell the suit schedule property, defendant No.1 who is intending purchaser approached the plaintiffs on 10.09.2021 and demanded the plaintiffs to produce the legal heir certificate for registration of the suit schedule properties. The plaintiffs having no other alternative approached this court by filing this suit.

5. The point for consideration: “Whether the plaintiffs are entitled to

be declared as legal heirs of deceased Late Annapa Reddy Nagi Reddy

not?

6. The prove the claim of the plaintiffs they got examined plaintiff

No.1 as Pw1 and got marked Ex.A1 to A12 as follows:

Ex.A1 is the True copy of Registered sale deed bearing

no.7454/2019, dated 29.06.2019

OS No.637/2021 4 of 6 Dt:05.05.2022

Ex.A2 is the True copy of Agreement of Sale cum A.G.P.A with

position document bearing No.14307/2019, dated 05.07.2019

Ex.A3 is the True copy of Agreement of Sale Cum A.G.P.A with

position document bearing No.14310/2019 dated 06.07.2019.

Ex.A4 is the original of death certificate of Sri. Annapareddy Nagi

Reddy

Ex.A5 is the original of death certificate of Smt. A.Prameela

Ex.A6 is the family members certificate dated 20.07.2021

Ex.A7 is the Oriiginal Aadhar Card of Annapa Reddy Nagi Reddy

Ex.A8 is the Original Aadhar Card of Smt. Prameela.

Ex.A9 is the Original Aadhar Card of Plaintiff No.1

Ex.A10 is the Original Aadhar Card of Plaintiff No.2.

Ex.A11 is the Original Encumbrance Certificate dated

Ex.A12 is the Original Market Valuation Certificate for schedule A

7. Summons served to Defendant No.1, defendant No.1 called absent. No representation . Hence defendant No.1 was set exparte. Paper publication filed for defendant no.2 who is all concerned defendant no.2 called absent, no representation.

8. On perusal of the entire oral as well as documentary evidence on record which shows that the deceased died on 03.05.2021 and is wife

Prameela died on 03.05.2021. As per Ex.A6 it shows that plaintiff No.1 and 2 are the daughter and son of the deceased persons, during the life time of father of plaintiffs he acquired suit schedule properties “A”, “B” and “C” vide

Ex.A1 to A3 . On the other hand the defendants did not chose to contest the claim of the plaintiff. The oral and documentary evidence is not disproved by the defendants, hence there are no grounds to dismiss the

OS No.637/2021 5 of 6 Dt:05.05.2022

claim of the plaintiff. Hence the plaintiffs are entitled to declare them as legal heir of deceased Late Sri.Annapa Reddy Nagi Reddy. Accordingly, the point is answered in favour of plaintiffs as against the defendants.

9. In the result, suit is decreed in favour of plaintiffs and hereby declaring that the plaintiffs are the legal heirs of deceased Late

Sri.Annapa Reddy Nagi Reddy, who died on 03.05.2021. No order as to costs.

Dictated to the Stenographer, corrected and pronounced by me in the

open Court on this the 05th day of May, 2022.

JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE,

HAYATHNAGAR

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

WITNESSES EXAMINED

FOR PLAINTIFFS: FOR DEFENDANTS:

PW-1: A.Srinivas Reddy -None-

EXHIBITS MARKED

FOR PLAINTIFFS:

Ex.A1 True copy of Registered sale deed bearing

no.7454/2019, dated 09.06.2019

Ex.A2 True copy of Agreement of Sale cum A.G.P.A with position

document bearing No.14307/2019, dated 05.07.2019

Ex.A3 True copy of Agreement of Sale Cum A.G.P.A with position

document bearing No.14310/2019 dated 06.07.2019.

Ex.A4 original of death certificate of Sri. Annapareddy Nagi Reddy

Ex.A5 original of death certificate of Smt. A.Prameela

Ex.A6 family members certificate dated 20.07.2021

Ex.A7 Oriiginal Aadhar Card of Annapa Reddy Nagi Reddy

Ex.A8 Original Aadhar Card of Smt. Prameela.

OS No.637/2021 6 of 6 Dt:05.05.2022

Ex.A9 Original Aadhar Card of Plaintiff No.1

Ex.A10 Original Aadhar Card of Plaintiff No.2.

Ex.A11 Original Encumbrance Certificate dated

Ex.A12 Original Market Valuation Certificate for schedule A

FOR DEFENDANTs:

-Nil.

JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE

HAYATHNAGAR.

OS No.637/2021 7 of 6 Dt:05.05.2022

CC/397/2018 Acquitted

P.S.Hayathnagar vs Sudhakar

14 Mar 2023

1

CC.No.397/2018 Dt:14.03.2023

IN THE COURT OF THE XIV ADDITIONAL METROPOLITAN

MAGISTRATE CYBERABAD AT HAYATHNAGAR

Present: SMT.P.CHANDANA,

XIV Addl. Metropolitan Magistrate,

Cyberabad at Hayathnagar,R.R.Dist.

This the 14 th day of March, 2023

C.C.No.397 of 2018

(Cr.No.154 of 2018 of Hayathnagar Police Station)

Between:

The state of Telangana through Sub-Inspector of Police Hayathnagar Police Station Represented by Assistant Public Prosecutor ….Complainant

AND

Saidu Sudhakar S/o. Late Pentaiah Aged about:34 years, Occ: Worker at Hotel Caste: SC Madiga, R/o. Shanthinagar, Pedda Amberpet Village of Abdullapurmet Mandal, Ranga Reddy District …Accused

This case is coming on 14.03.2023 for Judgment before me, in the presence of Assistant Public Prosecutor for the State, and of Sri K.Surender Reddy, Counsel for the accused and perusing the material available on record, and upon hearing the argument on both side this court delivered the following order:

J U D G E M E N T

1. The Sub-Inspector of police, Hayathnagar Police Station filed charge sheet against accused for the offence under section 354-D of IPC.

2. The case of the prosecution is that on 04.03.2018 at 11:00 hours Lw-4 (K.Satish), Inspector of police received a complaint from the complainant Smt.

Bolla Swathi W/o. Esuratnam , in which she stated that, she went to work for three days in the Hotel situated at Pedda Amberpet, where her mother-in-law also working . There is one cook by name Sudhakar obtained her phone number and started calling her over phone, harassing her by stalking her

2

CC.No.397/2018 Dt:14.03.2023

even though the said Sudhakar put her words in deaf ear that already she got married and had children , but the said Sudhakar enhanced harassment and asked her to stay with him. Hence she requested to take necessary action. The complainant lodged a report. Basing on the said report, LW-4, (Sri Satish)

Inspector of police registered a case in Cr.No.154/2018 for the offence U/s.354-

D of IPC and LW-5 (G.Raman Goud), Sub Inspector of police took up investigation. During the course of investigation, LW-5 (G.Rmana Goud) Sub-

Inspector of police examined LW-1 (Smt. Bolla Swathi) at police station and recorded her statement. Accused was sent to judicial custody and after completion of investigation, LW-5 (G.Raman Goud), Sub-Inspector of police filed charge sheet against the accused and issued summons to the accused.

3. On perusal of the record, this court has taken cognizance of offence punishable under Section 354-D of IPC against accused.

4.On the appearance of accused copies of case document furnished to accused in compliance of section 207 Cr.P.C.

5.Accused was examined U/s.239 of Criminal Procedure Code by explaining and reading over the contents of charge sheet under Sections offence 354-D of IPC in Telugu, for which he denied, charge framed read over to the accused who and explained pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.

Hence, the case was posted for trial.

6.During the course of trial, prosecution has examined PW-1 and got marked Ex.P1.

7.After closure of prosecution evidence, accused was examined

U/s. 313 of Criminal Procedure Code by explaining the incriminating prosecution evidence in question form in Telugu, for which he denied the same

3

CC.No.397/2018 Dt:14.03.2023

and reported that there is no defence evidence and no documents were marked on his behalf.

8. Heard arguments of the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor and learned defence counsel. Perused the entire record.

9 Now the Point for determination is : whether the

prosecution is able to establish the guilt of accused for the offence

punishable U/s. 354-D of IPC beyond all reasonable doubt?

10. Point: To prove the guilt of the accused prosecution examined

Pws 1 and got marked and Ex.P1. The prosecution could not examine Lw-1 ( Bolla Swathi ) , Lw-2 (Smt. Srilaxmi) and Lw-3 (Sri.Bolla Yesurathnam) as there whereabouts could not be known . As such their evidence was closed by this court. Evidence of Lw-4 ( K.Satish, Inspector of police) was given up by the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor as Pw-1 supported the case.

11.On perusal of the evidence of Pw-1 he deposed that Lw-4 Sri K.Satish

Inspector or Police P.S Hayathnagar registered this case, Pw-1 took up the investigation and examined the witnesses in this case , sending the accused to the and judicial custody after completion of the investigation filed charge sheet. During the cross-examination Pw-1 denied that accused is no way concerned with this case. In this case the material witness i.e., Lw-1 ( Smt.

Bolla Swathi) she is victim but Lw-1 ( Smt. Bolla Swathi) could not be examined to prove the allegations alleged against the accused for the offence U/sec. 354-

D of IPC. In the absence of testimony of the victim, this court cannot come to the conclusion that accused has committed the alleged offence . As there is no incriminating evidence on record, conviction cannot be based on the accused baring up on the sale evidence of formal witness i.e., Pw-1 . Therefore the prosecution as utterly failed to establish the ingredients of the

4

CC.No.397/2018 Dt:14.03.2023

offence U/s. 354-D of IPC against the accused person beyond all reasonable doubts. Accordingly Point is answered against the prosecution.

12. In the result this court found the accused not guilty for offence

U/s. 354-D of IPC. Accordingly accused is acquitted , U/s.248(1) Cr.P.C. No order passed regarding case property as nothing was deposited. Surety bonds of accused shall stands cancelled after the expiry of six (6) months

Partly dictated to Stenographer, transcribed by her, corrected and pronounced by me in the open court on the 14th day of March, 2023.

XIV ADDL. METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE

CYBERABAD AT HAYATHNAGAR

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

WITNESS EXAMINED

FOR PROSECUTION: FOR DEFENCE: -None- PW1: G.Raman Goud

DOCUMENTS MARKED

FOR PROSECUTION: FOR DEFENCE: -Nil- Ex.P1: Police Report along with FIR

MATERIAL OBJECTS

FOR PROSECUTION: FOR DEFENCE: -Nil- -Nil-

XIV ADDL. METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE

CYBERABAD AT HAYATHNAGAR

5

CC.No.397/2018 Dt:14.03.2023

C A L E N D A R

IN THE COURT OF THE XIV ADDL. METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE

CYBERABAD AT HAYATHNAGAR, RANGA REDDY DSTRICT

C.C.NO.397/ 2018

1Name of the Complainant:P.S. Hayathnagar 2Name of the Accused:Saidu Sudhakar S/o. Late Pentaiah Aged about:34 years, Occ: Worker at Hotel Caste: SC Madiga, R/o. Shanthinagar, Pedda Amberpet Village of Abdullapurmet Mandal, Ranga Reddy District 3 Offence under section : 354-D of IPC 4Date of offence :04.03.2018 5Date of complaint :04.03.2028 6Date of Apprehension:29.04.2019 7Date of Commencement of :29.04.2019 trial 8Date of closure of trial :14.03.2023 9Date of Judgment :14.03.2023 10Finding of the Court: In the result this court found the accused not guilty for offence U/s. 304-A of IPC. Accordingly accused is acquitted , U/s. 255(1) Cr.P.C. No order passed regarding case property as nothing was deposited. Surety bonds of accused shall stands cancelled after the expiry of six (6) months 11Reasons for delay in disposal :-- of case

XIV Addl. Metropolitan Magistrate, Cyberabad at Hayathnagar, Copy to: The Hon’ble Metropolitan Sessions Judge Cyberabad, R.R.District at L.B.Nagar.

6

CC.No.397/2018 Dt:14.03.2023

Order Record 305 total

Case No.	Parties	Date	Type	Outcome
CC/497/2018	P S Hayathnagar vs Jitta Mahipal Reddy	26 Apr 2023	Judgement	Acquitted
CC/397/2018	P.S.Hayathnagar vs Sudhakar	14 Mar 2023	Judgement	Acquitted
CC/534/2017	Nalla Renuka vs Nalla Jangaiah	08 Mar 2023	Judgement	Acquitted
OS/294/2022	SMT PULIPATI @ S. SRIDEVI W/O LATE SEERAMAMARBABU vs THE TAHSILDHAR ABDULLAPURMET AND ALL CONCERNED	28 Feb 2023	Judgement	—
CC/1422/2018	PS Abdullapurmet vs Merugu Mallaiah	28 Feb 2023	Judgement	Acquitted
OS/237/2022	S.RAJEEV BABU, S/O. SULUVAI VASANTHA ALIAS VASANTH vs SMT SULUVAI LAKSHMI, W/O. LATE SULUVAI VASANTHA	27 Feb 2023	Judgement	—
OS/567/2022	Jayanti Yasodhara Devi W/o J.V. Sharma vs The Tahasildar, Abdullapurmet	27 Feb 2023	Judgement	—
OS/51/2022	Goura Anjaiah vs Achana Jangaiah	23 Feb 2023	Judgement	—
OS/265/2022	DYVA ASIRVADAM BANDRAPALLI, S/O. LATE DANIEL BANDRAPALLI vs THE TAHSILDAR, HAYATHNAGAR MANDAL	23 Feb 2023	Judgement	—
CC/835/2019	ABDULAPURMET vs SK JAHANGEER	23 Feb 2023	Judgement	—
OS/463/2022	Podilapu Suguna W/o late Kurma Rao vs Chitrala Jagadish S/o late Ch. Danaiah	21 Feb 2023	Judgement	—
OS/610/2022	Kurakula Tirumala W/o Late Y. Shankar vs The Tahsildar	21 Feb 2023	Judgement	—
OS/171/2022	P.MAHENDER , S/O. P.SUDARSHAN REDDY vs P.CHANDRASHEKAR RAO, S/O. P.KOTI LINGAIAH	20 Feb 2023	Judgement	—
OS/745/2022	SMT GUDALA SABITHA W/O LATE GUDALA RAMESH vs DASARI DHANRAJ S/O DASARI NANDAM	20 Feb 2023	Judgement	—
CC/654/2017	PS Hayathnagar vs Pilla Gopal Reddy	17 Feb 2023	Judgement	—
OS/730/2022	Anagani Kasturi Vani W/o Anagani Nancharaiah vs Ravula Raj Bharath S/o Ravula Jagapathi Rao	16 Feb 2023	Judgement	—
OS/736/2022	Maringanti kavitha W/o late Mariganti Shyam Prasad and 2 others vs Guntupalli Venkateshwara Rao S/o G.Bapaiah	16 Feb 2023	Judgement	—
OS/233/2022	RAMA BAI SHINDE, W/O. LATE PRAKASH RAO SHINDE vs THE MANDAL REVENUE OFFICER TURKAYAMJAL	15 Feb 2023	Judgement	—
OS/465/2022	Lella Vamsi Krishna S/o Late Lakshmi Vara Prasad Rao vs G. Ram Babu S/o G. Venkateswarlu	15 Feb 2023	Judgement	—
OS/574/2022	Mandala Manoj Kumar S/o Mandala Ramchandar vs A. Maharaju S/o A. Sathaiah	15 Feb 2023	Judgement	—
OS/325/2018	Cherukuri Group rep by its prop. Ch.Gopinath vs A.Ramalingeshwara Rao	13 Feb 2023	Judgement	—
OS/42/2022	Namani Shivaram vs Vadapalli Zacharaiah	10 Feb 2023	Judgement	—
OS/368/2019	T.VISHNU vs REDDY VENKAT NARAYANA	10 Feb 2023	Judgement	—
OS/801/2022	Madugani Shailaja w/o M.Srnivas yadav vs Burri Lingamaiah S/o Burri Gopamma	10 Feb 2023	Judgement	—
OS/813/2022	Bathula Padma vs The Special Dy. collector	09 Feb 2023	Judgement	—
OS/714/2022	TunK rajini vs The Tahsildhar	07 Feb 2023	Judgement	—
OS/755/2022	Mohammad Ahmed Unnisa Begum W/o Mohammed Kazam Ali vs The Tahsildar	07 Feb 2023	Judgement	—
OS/192/2022	ANUMULA LEELAVATHI, W/O. LATE ANUMULA YADAGIRI vs THE TAHSILDHAR, HAYATHNAGAR MANDAL	06 Feb 2023	Judgement	—
OS/373/2022	B. NARSIMHA S/O LATE B. LAXMAIAH vs THE TAHSILDHAR ABDULLAPURMET MANDAL AND ALL CONCERNED	06 Feb 2023	Judgement	—
OS/683/2022	E. Vijayalaxmi W/o E. Balakrishna vs The Tahsildar, Abdullapurmet Mandal	06 Feb 2023	Judgement	—
OS/735/2022	S.Balraj Goud,S/o Late S.jangaiah Goud and 5 others vs Vsthe Tahsildhar	06 Feb 2023	Judgement	—
OS/346/2018	Cherukuri Group rep by its prop Ch.Gopinath vs P.Rathnamma	03 Feb 2023	Judgement	—
OS/348/2022	KALLEM SAMPOORNA W/OLATE K.MALLA REDDY AND OTHERS vs THE TAHSILDHAR ABDULLAPURMET MANDAL R.R DIST	03 Feb 2023	Judgement	—
OS/492/2022	Penumudi Seethamaha Lakshmi W/o Late P. Koteswara Rao vs The Tahsildar, Hayathnagar Mdl.	03 Feb 2023	Judgement	—
OS/564/2022	Raghavabotla Bhavani Devi W/o R. Naga Bramhananda Rao vs The Thahasildar, Abdullahpurmet	03 Feb 2023	Judgement	—
OS/651/2022	Smt. Bayya Saritha W/o. Late Bayya naresh vs Nakka Venkataiah	03 Feb 2023	Judgement	—
OS/27/2018	Sankalamaddi Chaitanya vs Sri Gaddam Babaiah	02 Feb 2023	Judgement	—
OS/124/2022	GOUNI BHAGYAMMA, W/O. LATE GOUNI SRINIVAS vs CHERALAPALLY BALA KRISHNA GOUD, S/O. SHANKARAIAH	02 Feb 2023	Judgement	—
OS/320/2022	CHEGURI SRISAILAM S/O CH VEERAIAH vs PILLI NARSIMHA S/O LATE JANGAIAH AND OTEHRS	02 Feb 2023	Judgement	—
OS/547/2022	Sulake Kalyani W/o Sulake Anand Rao vs The Tahsildar, Abdullapurmet	01 Feb 2023	Judgement	—
OS/555/2022	Kasi Reddy Lalitha W/o Kasi Reddy Satyanaryana Reddy vs All Concerned	01 Feb 2023	Judgement	—
OS/339/2022	GADE KAMALA W/O LATE KISTAIAH AND 3 OTHERS vs THE TAHSILDHAR HAYATH NGR MANDAL AND ALL CONCERNED	30 Jan 2023	Judgement	—
OS/646/2022	VAle Premalatha W/o. Valle Sanjeeva Reddy vs The MRO	30 Jan 2023	Judgement	—
OS/708/2022	D. Parvathi Naik W/o Dharavath Ramulu Naik vs B. Bhoopal Reddy S/o B. Lachi Reddy	25 Jan 2023	Judgement	—
OS/793/2022	Dontha Bhagavathipriya W/o D. Ramesh Prasad vs Pannala Janga Reddy S/o P. Seetharam Reddy	25 Jan 2023	Judgement	—
OS/808/2022	Pramila Kistataih thadakmalla vs Janagam SyamPrasad	25 Jan 2023	Judgement	—
OS/563/2022	M.N. Usha Sarada W/o Manda Nageswar Rao vs The Tahsildar, Hayath Nagar	23 Jan 2023	Judgement	—
OS/353/2022	MEKAM JANGAIAH S/O LATE M. BEERAPPA AND 4 OTHERS vs THE TAHSILDHAR , HAYATH NGR MANDAL AND ALL CONCERNED	20 Jan 2023	Judgement	—
OS/526/2022	Singireddy Andalu W/o Late Singireddy Ram Reddy vs The Mnadal Revenue Officer/Tahsildar, Abdullapurmet	20 Jan 2023	Judgement	—
OS/210/2022	SMT. KOTAMRAJU SWETHA, D/O. LATE KOTAM RAJU PRASAD RAO W/O. VARAHALA NAGENDER vs ALL CONCERNED	19 Jan 2023	Judgement	—
CC/1105/2018	PS Abdullapurmet vs Salagala suresh babu	17 Jan 2023	Judgement	—
OS/374/2022	KESMMASARAM MALLESH S/O K. DURGAIAH AND 2 OTEHRS vs THE M.R.O HAYATH NGR , AND MRO ABDULLAPURMET ALL CONCERNED	11 Jan 2023	Judgement	—
OS/537/2022	Vuppu Anjaiah S/o Vuppu Somaiah vs The Tahsildar, Hayathnagar	11 Jan 2023	Judgement	—
OS/170/2022	KANDADI ASHOK REDDY, S/O. K.YADAIAH vs MERUGU BABU YADAV, S/O. M.YADAIAH	10 Jan 2023	Judgement	—
OS/541/2022	Gajula Radha W/o Prabhakar Murthy vs The Tahsildar/Joint Sub-Registrar, Hayathnagar	10 Jan 2023	Judgement	—
OS/297/2022	MADUGURI VARALAXMI W/O LATE M. PRAKASH AND 4 OTHERS vs THE MRO ABDULLAPURMET MANDAL AND ALL CONCERNED	06 Jan 2023	Judgement	—
OS/618/2022	Susheel Kumar L S/o Ghanshyam @ Ghanshyam Lalaji vs The Tahsildar, Abdullapurmet	06 Jan 2023	Judgement	—
OS/673/2022	Nandamuri Rathnamani W/o N.S.R.C.V. Prasada Rao vs The Tahsildar, Abdullapurmet	06 Jan 2023	Judgement	—
OS/691/2022	Karnati Renuka W/o Karnati Nageshwar Rao vs The Tahsildar-Hayathnagar Mandal	06 Jan 2023	Judgement	—
OS/692/2022	Rayasam Sita Rama Anjaneya Sarma vs Tha Tahsildar-Abdullapurmet Mandal	06 Jan 2023	Judgement	—
OS/71/2022	DASHYAM NAGESH, S/O. LATE DASHYAM SUDARSHAN vs THE TAHSILDAR ANDANOTHER	05 Jan 2023	Judgement	—
OS/117/2022	SAMBANGI VIJAYA LAXMI, W/O. LATE VENKATESHWAR RAO vs THE TAHSILDAR THE MANDAL REVENUE OFFICER	05 Jan 2023	Judgement	—
OS/486/2022	T. Chandra Bhushan Singh S/o Shamsheer Singh vs Parepally Srinivas S/o Late P. Venkateshwarlu	04 Jan 2023	Judgement	—
OS/540/2022	Dokur Ramadevi W/o Late D. Padma Reddy vs All Concerned	04 Jan 2023	Judgement	—
OS/707/2022	Bajamahal Phani Kumar S/o B. Vidya Sagar vs The Tahsildar, Hayathnagar Mandal	04 Jan 2023	Judgement	—
OS/432/2022	RAJOLI SUJATHA W/O LATE R. JAYRAJ AND vs ALL CONCERNED, THE TAHSILDHAR HAYATH NGR , RR DIST	20 Dec 2022	Judgement	—
OS/67/2022	Iftequar Jehan Begum vs Syed Murtuza Ali	28 Sep 2022	Judgement	—
OS/244/2017	Pulivarthi Shiva Rama Prasad vs K.Prabhakara Reddy	23 Sep 2022	Judgement	—
OS/262/2016	Smt. Rayala varalaxmi vs Aedumekhala krishnaiah	23 Sep 2022	Judgement	—
OS/13/2015	G. Narsimha vs Y. Suryanarayana	22 Sep 2022	Judgement	—
OS/90/2017	Mandadi Srinivas Rao vs Sam Reddy Laxma Reddy	22 Sep 2022	Judgement	—
OS/75/2017	U.Ramesh vs Dandotikar Vijay Prakash	20 Sep 2022	Judgement	—
OS/126/2019	ETTAM RAMREDDY vs SRIPATHI BHAGWAN REDDY	20 Sep 2022	Judgement	—
OS/156/2022	SMT.YEMBAR BALAMANI, W/O. Y.SHRAVAN KUMAR , D/O. LATE PILLI SATHAIAH vs JAKKIREDDY RAJASEKHAR REDDY, S/O. J.GOVINDA REDDY	20 Sep 2022	Judgement	—
OS/243/2022	BELLAPU NAVANEETHA, W/O. B.VITTAL RAO vs THE TAHSILDAR MANDAL REVENUE OFFICER	20 Sep 2022	Judgement	—
OS/284/2022	KOPPOLU INDIRA, W/O. LATE TADKAMALLA PRAMOD KUMAR vs THE TAHSILDAR, ABDULLAPURMET MANDAL,	20 Sep 2022	Judgement	—
OS/194/2022	PILLI JANGAIAH, S/O. PILLI MALLESH vs SIDDALA MAHESH, S/O. SIDDALAMADARI	19 Sep 2022	Judgement	—
OS/340/2022	K.PUSHPALATHA W/O LATE K NARSIMHA REDDY AND 2 OTEHRS vs ALL CONCERNED, THE TAHSILDHAR HAYATH NGR MANDAL	19 Sep 2022	Judgement	—
OS/429/2022	DODDIMIDI GANGADHAR S/O D. ERAVANTH RAO AND OTHERS vs Vs1) K. SRINIVAS GOPAL KRISHNA S/O K. VENKATESHWAR RAO	19 Sep 2022	Judgement	—
OS/272/2022	MRS NOORJAHAN W/O LATE MOHD RAFI vs THE TAHSILDHAR MRO HAYATH NGR AND ALL CONCERNED	16 Sep 2022	Judgement	—
OS/245/2022	MUTHYALA SUBRAHMANYAM, S/O. LATE BASAVIAH vs THE M.R.O. HAYATHNAGAR MANDAL	15 Sep 2022	Judgement	—
OS/146/2022	SMT.MUNAGALA SATHAMMA, W/O. LATE M.YETTA REDDY vs THE TAHSILDAR, HAYATHNAGAR MANDAL	14 Sep 2022	Judgement	—
OS/107/2022	SMT.MOHD GALIB BEE, W/O. MOHD JAGEER D/O. KASHEEM SAB AND AMEENA BEE vs CH.BALA NARSIMHA, S/O. DANAIAH	13 Sep 2022	Judgement	—
OS/239/2019	SIDDAGONI NARASIMHA vs K CHENNA KISTAIAH	13 Sep 2022	Judgement	—
OS/45/2022	B. Anil Kumar vs A. Satyanarayana	12 Sep 2022	Judgement	—
OS/13/2022	A. Narsimha Reddy vs Tahasildar	08 Sep 2022	Judgement	—
OS/115/2022	SMT. YENNAM MARIYA RANI ALIAS K.RANI, W/O. LATE Y.BALA RAJU vs TAHASILDAR, ABDULLAPURMET	08 Sep 2022	Judgement	—
OS/135/2022	KHUMBHAM PRADEEP REDDY, S/O. LATE K.VENKAT REDDY vs B.BHASKAR, S/O. B.SALAIAH	08 Sep 2022	Judgement	—
OS/163/2022	K.YADAGIRI, S/O. LATE VENKATA SWAMY vs THE TAHSILDAR, ABDULLAPURMET	08 Sep 2022	Judgement	—
OS/203/2020	Chimmula Balamani vs All concerned	08 Sep 2022	Judgement	—
OS/388/2022	CHILLA NAGAIAH S/O LATE CHILLA SURAIAH AND 4 OTHERS vs THE TAHSILDHAR HAYATH NGR RR DIST AND ALL CONCERNED	08 Sep 2022	Judgement	—
OS/635/2021	POSIPO ANURADHA W/O LATE P PRASADA RAO vs THE TAHSILDHAR HAYATH NGR MANDAL RR DIST AND ALL CONCERNED	08 Sep 2022	Judgement	—
OS/913/2021	KOMPALLY SUMALATHA W/O LATE KOMPALLY SRINIVAS vs KOMPALLY ANSUYA W/O LATE KD. VENKATESH	08 Sep 2022	Judgement	—
OS/866/2021	J.NIRMALA, W/O. J.YADAGIRI ALIAS YADAIAH vs THE TAHSILDAR ABDULLAPURMET	02 Sep 2022	Judgement	—
OS/430/2020	Gopi Laxmi Narasamma vs The Thasildar, Malkajgiri	01 Sep 2022	Judgement	—
OS/38/2022	Chilaka Manamma vs Tahasildar	19 Jul 2022	Judgement	—
OS/48/2022	Jala Bantu Amrutha vs Tahasildar	19 Jul 2022	Judgement	—
OS/76/2022	RAM HAZOOR VISWAKARMA S/O. RAM RATHAN VISWAKARMA vs MODEPU BALASHIVUDU, S/O. M.BALARAJU	19 Jul 2022	Judgement	—
OS/77/2022	M.PREETHI PAVAN KUMAR, S/O. LATE M.PRASAD vs B.VEERESHAM S/O. JANGAIAH	19 Jul 2022	Judgement	—
OS/173/2022	RAVURI SHIVA NAGA RAJU S/O LATE R.NARSIMHA RAO vs S. SURESH S/O LAXMAIAH AND ALL CONCERNED	19 Jul 2022	Judgement	—

Showing 100 of 305 orders — Log in to browse all pages.

Monthly Orders (Last 12 Months)

Apr 2023		1
Mar 2023		2
Feb 2023		38
Jan 2023		24
Dec 2022		1
Sep 2022		29
Jul 2022		43
May 2022		6
Apr 2022		11
Mar 2022		3
Feb 2022		8
Jan 2022		14

Frequently Asked Questions

How many cases has Smt.P.Chandana handled?

Smt.P.Chandana has handled 305 court orders since 2021 at Hayathnagar, JCJcumXIV AMM Court Complex. The average disposal rate is 16 orders per month.

What types of cases does Smt.P.Chandana hear?

Based on available records, Smt.P.Chandana primarily handles Civil matters (Original Suits) and Criminal matters (Criminal Cases) at Hayathnagar, JCJcumXIV AMM Court Complex.

Where is Smt.P.Chandana currently posted?

Smt.P.Chandana is posted as Junior Civil Judge-cum-XIV Addl. Metropolitan Magistrate, Hayathnagar at Hayathnagar, JCJcumXIV AMM Court Complex, Rangareddy, Telangana.

Are judgments by Smt.P.Chandana available online?

Yes. 10 judgments by Smt.P.Chandana are available on Legistro with full text, outcome, and sections cited.

How fast does Smt.P.Chandana dispose cases?

Smt.P.Chandana disposes approximately 16 cases per month, based on 305 orders handled over their tenure at Hayathnagar, JCJcumXIV AMM Court Complex.

Since when is Smt.P.Chandana serving?

Smt.P.Chandana has been serving at Hayathnagar, JCJcumXIV AMM Court Complex since 2021.

Case Types

OS 98%

CC 2%

Posting History

Jun 2022 — May 2023

Junior Civil Judge-cum-XIV Addl. Metropolitan Magistrate, Hayathnagar · 138 orders
Oct 2021 — Jun 2022

JCJ Cum XXIV Addl MM at Hayathnagar · 167 orders

Outcomes on Record

Acquitted 4

Other Judges at this Court

Ms. Farheen Begum

Principal Junior Civil Judge-cum-XIV Addl. Judicia...

6 orders

← View all judges at Hayathnagar, JCJcumXIV AMM Court Complex