Sri. P. David

1

IN THE COURT OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE :: KADIRI

Present:- P.David, Senior Civil Judge, Penukonda FAC/Senior Civil Judge, Kadiri.

Friday, the 06th day of April, 2018.

O.S No. 118/2017

Between:

Smt. Vadithe Uthamma, W/o V Narayana Naik, aged about 42 years, Hindu, Sugali by caste, cultivation, resident of Door No.15-106-49, Kutagulla village and Post, Kadiri Municipality, Kadiri Mandal, Anantapur District.

… Plaintiffs. And.,

Smt. Bhukya Balaji Naik, S/o Chakre Naik, aged abot 40 years, Sugali by caste, cultivation, Door No.15-82, & 15-106-1A, Kutagulla village and post, Kadiri Municipality, Kadiri Mandal, Anantapuramu District. … Defendants .

This suit is coming on 09.3.2018 for final hearing in the presence of Sri A. Gangi Reddy, Advocate for Plaintiff and the Defendant is remained exparte, and perused the material papers and having stood over for consideration till this day, this court delivered the following:

J U D G M E N T

1.The plaintiff sought the relief of partition of schedule property into two equal shares and to allot one such share to her and award costs and such other reliefs.

2.The particulars of the plaint in brief are:- The plaintiff and defendant are sister and brother born to B. Chakre Naik and B.

Prameela Bai. The plaint schedule properties are ancestral in nature.

The 4th item is Government land and it was alloted to their father

Chakre Naik under D Form Patta. Their mother died on 13.8.2017 and plaintiff and defendants are only legal heirs.

The plaintiff was married to V. Narayana Naik in the year 1994, at the time of marriage her parents promised to provide some 2 property in her name but they did not keep up their promises. The defendant is residing in Items No.4 and 5 in Door No.15-82 and 15- 106-1A. She being co-parcener along with defendant she is also entitled for half share.

Since the defendant is attempting to deprive her right and trying to create nominal documents, she is not interested to keep the property in joint possession and issued legal notice. The defendant did not bother to effect the partition. Hence, the suit.

3.The Defendant was called absent and set exparte.

4. The plaintiff himself examined as P.W.1 and marked Exs.A.1 to A.9.

5. Heard plaintiff's counsel.

6. The points for consideration is :

Whether the plaintiff is entitled for the relief

as sought for?

8. Point :-

PW.1's evidence is nothing but replica of plaint averments.

Ex.A.1 is Office copy of legal notice issued to defendant and his mother

Bhukya Prameela Bai issued by V. Uthamma, the plaintiff seeking 1/3rd share in the schedule properties. Ex.A.2 to A.4 are Postal acknowledgment and receipts and returned postal cover returned from defendant B. Balaji Naik. Ex.A.5 is office copy of reply notice issued by

Prameeela Bai, their mother. Exs.A.6 and A.7 are market value certificates issued by Sub-Registrar, Kadiri of structures. Ex.A.8 is the

Valuation slip. Ex.A.9 is Genealogy. Apparently the defendant 3 remained absent and exparte. However, it is always on the plaintiff to establish their right on the disputed property. The documents relied upon are nothing but notice corresponding, postal receipts and acknowledgment and valuation certificates. The plaintiff claims items

No.1 to 3 which are the agricultural lands acquired by the joint family properties. Item No.4 and 5 are the houses in which the defendant is residing who was also acquired from the joint family property. Except plaintiff's oral evidence, no tangible documentary evidence. Hence, plaintiff miserably failed to establish her right in the schedule properties. Suit is devoid of merits.

9.In the result, the suit is dismissed.

Dictated to the Stenographer, transcribed by him, corrected

and pronounced by me in the open Court, this the 06th day of April, 2018.

Senior Civil Judge,

Penukonda.

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE:

Witnesses examined:

For Plaintiff:

PW 1 : V. Uthamma (Plaintiff).

For defendant: None.

Exhibits marked f or plaintiff:

Ex.A.1Office copy of Notice got issued by the plaintiff to the defendant's mother and the defendant.

Ex.A.2Postal Acknowledgment served on the defendant's mother.

Ex.A.3Postal Receipts (2) in sending documentno1 to the defendant's mother.

Ex.A.4Returned registered cover addressed to the defendant with postal acknowledgment.

4

Ex.A.5Reply notice got issued by the defendant's mother to the plaintiff's counsel.

Ex.A.6Valuation certificate issued by the Sub-Registrar, Kadiri for item No.1 to 3 of the plaint schedule.

Ex.A.7Valuation certificate issued by the Sub-Registrar, Kadiri for item No.5 of the plaint schedule.

Ex.A.8Valuation slip.

Ex.A.9Genealogy.

For defendant: Nil.

S.C.J.

Back

Daily Status

In the Court of :Senior Civil Judge

Case No. :OS/0000103/2017 K.Ramakrishna Vs B.Allabakash Khan

Date : 23-03-2018

Business: P.W.2 is examined. No further evidence. Judgment

pronounced. V.S.J. In the result, the suit is decreed with

costs against the defendant for a sum of Rs.3,34,692/- with future interest at 24 percent per annum from the date of filing the suit till the date of decree and at 6 percent per annum from the date of decree till realization on the balance of principal amount of Rs.2,94,000/-. Nature of Disposal: DECREED WITH COSTS Disposal Date: 23-03-2018

Senior Civil Judge

In the Court of :Senior Civil Judge

Case No. :OS/0000100/2010 Bramhacgharini Bhavya Chithanya Vs Jayachandra Reddy

Date  : 29-03-2018

Business: Judgment pronounced V.S.J In the result, the suit is decreed with costs declaring the plaintiffs right and title over the plaint schedule properties and the defendants shall deliver physical possession of plaint schedule properties to the plaintiff within two months from the date of decree, in default, plaintiff is at liberty to get the same through process of law.

In the Court of :Senior Civil Judge

Case No. :SC/0000315/2017 S.H.O Gorantla P.S. Vs Vadithya Thirumulesh Naik @ Chinna Ramla Naik

Date  : 31-03-2018

Business: Accused present. Judgment pronounced (V.S.J.). In the result, the accused is found not guilty for the of ofence punishable U/s 498-A, 307 IPC and he is acquitted of the same U/s.232 Cr.P.C. The bail bonds of the accused shall b stand canceled. MOs.1 and 2 shall be destroyed after expiry of appeal time.

In the Court of :Senior Civil Judge

Case No. :OS/0000054/2017 D. Swapna Vs Gorthi Subbarayudu

Date  : 31-03-2018

Business: Both parties absent, hence sent back to regular court. call on since both parties and counsels present .Both parties filed terms and compromise and read over to both parties .Both parties admitted to be true and correct Hence the suit is decreed as per terms and conditions of compromise and pass award accordingly.