Smt. P.Devi Manasa

O. S . No. 761/ 20 23 II JCJ-cum-JMFC

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

JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS, AT KUSHAIGUDA.

PRESENT: SMT. P. DEVI MANASA II Addl. Junior Civil Judge-cum-Judicial

Magistrate of First Class at Kushaiguda.

Friday, this the 20 thday of September, 2024.

Original Suit No.761 of 2023

Between: Smt.Venkamma Chekuri W/o.Late Chekuri Venkat Raju Aged about : 72 years, Occ : Home Maker, R/o.H.No.1-4-218/1/5, Plot No.5, Maithri Enclave, Kapra, Medchal-Malkajgiri District ……Plaintiff

AND

Smt.Byrraju Susheela W/o.Sri B.Srinivasa Raju Aged about : 43 years, Occ : Business, R/o.Plot No.72, Saket Mithila, Kapra, ECIL Post, Hyderabad – 500 062 ...…Defendant

This Suit is coming up before me for final hearing on 21-08-2024 in the presence of Sri V.Sethu Madhava Rao, Learned counsel for Plaintiff and defendant is set exparte, upon perusing the material papers available on record, and the matter having stood over for consideration, this Court delivered the following:

: J U D G M E N T :

1.The present suit is instituted by the plaintiff seeking the relief of cancellation of registered cancellation of sale deed vide document no.5435 of 2021 dated 21.08.2021 and for permanent injunction.

II JCJ

O. S . No. 761/ 20 23 II JCJ-cum-JMFC 2(i)It is submitted that originally defendant was the owner of the suit schedule property plot bearing no.5 in

Sy.No.633/Part, 634/Part, 635 and 638 under Block No.3, admeasuring 350 Sq. Yards situated at Maithri Enclave, Kapra circle, Kapra Revenue Mandal, Medchal-Malkajgiri District having purchased the same from its owner G.Chinnappa Reddy by virtue of registered sale deed vide document no.699 of 2016 dated 22.02.2016. It is submitted that G.Chinnappa Reddy in turn purchased the suit schedule property from Rahimtula represented by their GPA holder Mr.G.Bal Reddy & Others through registered sale deed vide document no.9304 of 2006

dated 14.11.2006.

ii)It is submitted that defendant intended to sell the suit schedule property for a sale consideration amount of Rs.12,25,000/- and the plaintiff agreed to purchase the suit schedule property and paid the amount to the defendant. The defendant having received the amount of

Rs.12,25,000/- executed registered sale deed document no.795 of 2021 dated 25.01.2021 in favour of plaintiff.

iii)It is submitted that defendant played fraud on plaintiff by stating that some rectification is required to be

II JCJ

O. S . No. 761/ 20 23 II JCJ-cum-JMFC done in the sale deed document no.795/2021 executed by him in favour of plaintiff with respect to the suit schedule property has obtained signatures of plaintiff on printed documents without disclosing the contents of the said documents. It is submitted that plaintiff believed the words of defendant and put his signature on the deed brought by the defendant and attended the Sub-Registrar offi ce on 21.08.2021. That the plaintiff came to know in the mont of

October, 2022 that defendant played fraud and misrepresented and got the cancellation of the sale deed on 25.01.2021 vide regitered document no.5435 of 2021.

iv)It is submitted that plaintiff constructed ground + 2 upper floors and is residing in the suit schedule property. It is submitted that plaintiff name is mutated in the GHMC records vide proceedings dated 07.02.2023 and he is paying the property tax and door number was allotted to the suit schedule property. It is submitted that plaintiff got his Aadhar card transferred to the address of the suit schedule property. It is submitted that plaintiff applied for electricity connection and got the same in his name.

II JCJ

O. S . No. 761/ 20 23 II JCJ-cum-JMFC

v)It is submitted that plaintiff is in possession of the original sale deed no.795 of 2021 dated 25.01.2021 executed by the defendant in favour of the plaintiff and link document no.699 of 2016 dated 22.02.2016 and earlier link document no.9304 of 2006 dated 14.11.2006. It is submitted that plaintiff is in possession and enjoyment of the suit schedule property and the cancellation deed no.5435 of 2021 dated 21.08.2021 is not binding on the plaintiff. As such plaintiff filed the present suit to declare the cancellation of sale deed document no.5435 of 2021

dated 21.08.2021 as null and void document and for

permanent injunction.

3.Defendant is set exparte on 08.12.2023.

4. Heard the learned counsel for the plaintiff.

5. Points for determination are:

i.Whether the plaintiff is entitled for the decree to declare the cancellation of sale deed document no.5435 of 2021 dated 21.08.2021 as null and void document and not binding on the plaintiff?

ii.Whether the plaintiff is entitled for the decree of permanent injunction?

iii. To what relief?

II JCJ

O. S . No. 761/ 20 23 II JCJ-cum-JMFC

6. Point No. i and ii:

In support of her case, plaintiff examined herself as

PW-1 and marked Ex.A1 to Ex.A12. Ex.A1 is the registered sale deed vide document no.795 of 2021 dated 25.01.2021, Ex.A2 is the registered cancellation of sale deed document no.5435 of 2021 dated 21.08.2021, Ex.A3 is the registered sale deed no.699 of 2016 dated 22.02.2016, Ex.A4 is the registered sale deed no.9304 of 2006 dated 14.11.2006, Ex.A5 is the mutation proceedings issued by GHMC dated 07.02.2023, Ex.A6 is the property tax receipt dated 15.06.2023, Ex.A7 is the Aadhar card of plaintiff, Ex.A8 an A9 are the electricity bills, Ex.A10 to A12 are the receipts of sale consideration amount issued by the defendant in favour of plaintiff.

7. The evidence of PW-1 is replica of plaint averments.

Hence, the same is not reproduced here to avoid repetition of facts. The plaintiff claims that she acquired the suit schedule property vide Ex.A1 and the link documents are marked as Ex.A3 and A4 documents. Ex.A5 to A9 are the mutation proceedings, property tax receipts, Aadhar card and electricity bills showing that plaintiff is in possession of the suit schedule property since the date of its purchase. Ex.A2 is the cancellation of sale deed

II JCJ

O. S . No. 761/ 20 23 II JCJ-cum-JMFC document no.5435 of 2021 showing cancellation of sale deed document no.795 of 2021. The case of the plaintiff is that defendant by playing fraud and by misrepresenting plaintiff obtained the above said documents, as such the document is required to be declared as null and void document and not binding on the plaintiff.

8. The defendant for the reasons best known to him have remained exparte and did not contest the suit and no documentary evidence is present from their side. There is no contradictory material available on record disputing the documentary evidence filed by plaintiff. Accordingly the point is answered in favour of the plaintiff.

9. Point No. iii :

In the result, suit is decreed by declaring the registered cancellation of sale deed document no.5435 of 2021

dated 21.08.2021 as null and void document and not binding on

the plaintiff. Decree of perpetual injunction is granted by restraining the defendant and its associates claiming through it from interfering with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the plaintiff over the suit schedule property. Office is directed to address a letter to the Sub-Registrar, Medchal, Medchal-Malkajgiri

II JCJ

O. S . No. 761/ 20 23 II JCJ-cum-JMFC

District and Sub-Registrar, Kapra, Medchal-Malkajgiri District to make necessary endorsements in Book No.1 and other books / records reflecting the cancellation of sale deed document no.5435 of 2021 dated 21.08.2021. No order as to costs.

Typed to my dictation by Stenographer, corrected and

pronounced by me in the open Court on this the 20 th day of

September, 2024.

II Addl. Junior Civil Judge-cum-

Judicial Magistrate of First Class

At Kushaiguda

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

WITNESSES EXAMINED

For Plaintiff For Defendant

PW1: Venkamma Chekuri - Nil -

EXHIBITS MARKED

For Plaintiff Ex.A1 : is the registered sale deed document no.795 of 2021 daed 25.01.2021

Ex.A2 : is the registered cancellation of sale deed no.5435 of 2021 dated 21.08.2021

Ex.A3 : is the registered sale deed no.699 of 2016 dated 22.02.2016

Ex.A4 : is the registered sale deed no.9304 of 2006 dated 14.11.2006

Ex.A5 : is the mutation proceedings issued by GHMC dated 07.02.2023

Ex.A6 : is the property tax receipt dated 15.06.2023

Ex.A7 : is the Aadhar card of plaintiff

Ex.A8 : is the electricity bill dated 07.04.2023

II JCJ

O. S . No. 761/ 20 23 II JCJ-cum-JMFC

Ex.A9 : is the electricity bill dated 10.06.2023

Ex.A10 : is the receipt of sale consideration dated 25.01.2021

Ex.A11 : is the receipt of sale consideration dated 09.02.2021

Ex.A12 : is the receipt of sale consideration dated 18.03.2021

For Defendant Nil II Addl. Junior Civil Judge-cum-

Judicial Magistrate of First Class

At Kushaiguda

II JCJ

O. S . No. 761/ 20 23 II JCJ-cum-JMFC

DECREE IN ORIGINAL SUIT

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

JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS, AT KUSHAIGUDA.

PRESENT: SMT. P. DEVI MANASA II Addl. Junior Civil Judge-cum-Judicial

Magistrate of First Class at Kushaiguda.

Friday, this the 20 thday of September, 2024.

Original Suit No.761 of 2023

Between: Smt.Venkamma Chekuri W/o.Late Chekuri Venkat Raju Aged about : 72 years, Occ : Home Maker, R/o.H.No.1-4-218/1/5, Plot No.5, Maithri Enclave, Kapra, Medchal-Malkajgiri District ……Plaintiff

AND

Smt.Byrraju Susheela W/o.Sri B.Srinivasa Raju Aged about : 43 years, Occ : Business, R/o.Plot No.72, Saket Mithila, Kapra, ECIL Post, Hyderabad – 500 062 ...…Defendant

Claim: This Suit is filed for the relief of cancellation of registered cancellation of sale deed vide document no.5435 of 2021 dated 21.08.2021 and for permanent injunction.

Cause of Action: The Cause of action for the suit arose on 25.01.2021 when the defendant executed the registered sale deed no.795 of 2021

dated 25.01.2021 conveying right, title and interest in plot bearing no.5

in Sy.No.633/Part, 634/Part, 635 and 638 covered under Block No.3, admeasuring 350 SQ. yards or equivalent to 292.60 Sq. Meters situated at Maithri Enclave, Kapra within the limits of GHMC, Kapra circle, Kapra Revenue Mandal, Medchal-Malkajgiri District, Telangana state and the same was registered in SRO, Kapra and delivered possession of the property and subsequently plaintiff constructed G+2 Floors by spending huge money and has been in possession and enjoyment of the same and

II JCJ

O. S . No. 761/ 20 23 II JCJ-cum-JMFC the name of plaintiff is also mutated in GHMC records and also paid the property tax on 15.03.2023 and on 21.08.2021 when the plaintiff played fraud and obtained signatures of the plaintiff under the guise of Ratification deed but in October 2022 when the plaintiff came to know the fraud played by the defendant and has been demanding for cancellation of deed no.5435 of 2021 dated 21.08.2021 where the suit schedule property is situated within the jurisdiction of the Hon’ble Court.

Valuation: In the registered sale deed no.795 of 2021, the market value of the property is mentioned as Rs.12,25,000/-. The relief in the suit is for cancellation of the deed no.5435 of 2021 is also the same value. Hence the relief of declaration for cancellation of above deeds is valued at Rs.12,25,000/- under Section 37 of TSCF and SV Act. The relief of permanent injunction restraining the defendant from interfering with the plaintiffs possession and enjoyment of the suit schedule land is notionally valued at Rs.10,000/- but no court fee is payable under Section 37 as the relief of injunction is ancillary to the cancellation of deeds. Hence a court fee of Rs.14,726/- is paid herewith under Section 37 of TS Court Fee and Suits Valuations Act, 1956. Therefore, the total court fee of Rs.14,726/- is paid herewith.

Suit presented on: 03.10.2023 Suit numbered on: 03.10.2023

This suit came before me for final hearing on 21-08-2024 in the presence of Sri V.Sethu Madhava Rao, Learned counsel for Plaintiff and d efendant is set exparte and the matter having stood over for consideration, till this day, this court delivered the following:- 1). That the Suit of Plaintiffs be and the same is hereby Decreed.

2). That the suit of plaintiff is decreed by declaring the registered cancellation of sale deed document no.5435 of 2021 dated 21.08.2021 as null and void document and not binding on the plaintiff. 3). That the suit of plaintiff is granted decree of perpetual injunction is granted by restraining the defendant and its associates claiming through it from interfering with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the plaintiff over the suit schedule property.

II JCJ

O. S . No. 761/ 20 23 II JCJ-cum-JMFC 4). That the Office is directed to address a letter to the Sub-Registrar, Medchal, Medchal-Malkajgiri District and Sub-Registrar, Kapra, Medchal-Malkajgiri District to make necessary endorsements in Book No.1 and other books / records reflecting the cancellation of sale deed document no.5435 of 2021 dated 21.08.2021. 5). That there is an order as no costs of the suit.

Given under my hand and the seal of this Court on this the day of 20 thday of September, 2024.

II Addl. Junior Civil Judge-cum-

Judicial Magistrate of First Class

At Kushaiguda

COSTS OF THE SUIT

For Plaintiff For Defendants

1. Stamps on PlaintRs.14,726-00Rs. -

2. Stamps on Vakalat Rs. 2-00Ex-parte

3. Stamps on Process Rs. 70-00Rs. -

4. Advocate FeeMC and FC not filed.

5. Publication ChargesRs. -Rs.-

6. Miscellaneous Rs.-Rs.- ------------------------------------------------------------------- TOTAL Rs.14,798-00 Rs. - -------------------------------------------------------------------

II Addl. Junior Civil Judge-cum-

Judicial Magistrate of First Class

At Kushaiguda

SUIT SCHEDULE PROPERTY

All that the residential open plot bearing no.5, bearing H.No.1-4- 218/1/5, in Sy.No.633/Part, 634/Part, 635 and 638 covered under Block No.3, admeasuring 350 Sq. yards or equivalent to 292.60 Sq. Meters situated at Maithri Enclave, Kapra within the limits of GHMC, Kapra Circle, Kapra Revenue Mandal, Medchal-Malkajgiri District, Telangana State and bounded by :

II JCJ

O. S . No. 761/ 20 23 II JCJ-cum-JMFC

NORTH:Plot No.4 SOUTH:Plot No.6 EAST:40’-0’ wide road WEST:Part of Plot No.242 & B

II Addl. Junior Civil Judge-cum-

Judicial Magistrate of First Class

At Kushaiguda

II JCJ

OS No. 668 /202 4

II JCJ-cum-JMFC

IN THE COURT OF THE II ADDL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE-CUM-JUDICIAL

MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS, AT KUSHAIGUDA.

PRESENT: SMT. P. DEVI MANASA II Addl. Junior Civil Judge-cum-Judicial

Magistrate of First Class at Kushaiguda.

Thursday, this the 19 th day of September, 2024

Original Suit No.668 of 2024

Between:

1.Smt.Shanthi Matha Shaik W/o.Late Kabeer Das Shaik Aged about : 74 years, Occ : Housewife, R/o.H.No.6-2-26, Keesara Dayara, Keesara Mandal, Medchal-Malkajgiri District, Telangana State – 501 301

2.Smt.Shaik Anjani Devi W/o.Shaik Sekhar Babu D/o.Late Kabeer Das Shaik, Aged about : 46 years, Occ : Housewife, R/o.H.No.6-2-26, Keesara Dayara, Keesara Mandal, Medchal-Malkajgiri District, Telangana State – 501 301

3.Sri Shaik Shiva Rama Krishna S/o.Late Kabeer Das Shaik Aged about : 43 years, Occ : Pvt Employee, R/o.H.No.6-2-26, Keesara Dayara, Keesara Mandal, Medchal-Malkajgiri District,

Telangana State – 501 301 ........Plaintiffs

// A n d //

1.The Tahsildhar, Keesara Mandal, Medchal Malkajgiri District, Telangana State – 501 301

2.All concerned ..…..Defendants

This suit came before me for final hearing on 21-08-2024 in the presence of M/s.P.P.Raju, Advocate for Plaintiffs and the defendants set exparte and the matter having stood over for consideration, till this day, this court delivered the following:-

J U D G M E N T

1.This suit is filed by the plaintiffs praying this court to declare them as legal heirs of deceased Late Sri Shaik Kabeer Das, in the interests of Justice.

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

II JCJ

OS No. 668 /202 4

II JCJ-cum-JMFC

Plaintiff no.1 is wife and plaintiff no.2 is the daughter and plaintiff no.3 is son of deceased Late Sri Shaik Kabeer Das who died on 17.03.2024 leaving behind plaintiffs no.1 to 3 herein as his surviving legal heirs.It is submitted that during the life time of the deceased Sri Shaik Kabeer Das, he has acquired some immovable properties.

3.It is submitted that plaintiffs no.1 to 3 require legal heir certificate for their future use. As such the plaintiffs approached defendant no.1 to declare the plaintiffs as the only surviving legal heirs of deceased Late S Sri Shaik

Kabeer Das for which the defendant no.1 refused the request and orally advised to approach the Hon’ble Court for obtaining legal heir certificate. Left with no other alternative, plaintiffs filed this suit.

4.Defendant No.1 was set exparte on 22.07.2024. Plaintiffs issued publication in respect of Defendant No.2 in daily newspaper but none appeared

before the court and filed any objections. Hence, the defendant No.2 is set

exparte.

5.In support of their case, the plaintiff no.3 is examined as PW1 and plaintiff no.2 is examined as PW2 and got marked Exs.A1 to A5 including written arguments filed by the plaintiff.

6.Heard the learned counsel for the plaintiffs and perused written arguments.

7.Now the points for consideration are:-

1. Whether the plaintiffs are entitled to declare themselves

as legal heirs of Late Sri Shaik Kabeer Das?

2. To what relief?

II JCJ

OS No. 668 /202 4

II JCJ-cum-JMFC

8. Point No.1:- To substantiate the case of the plaintiffs, Plaintiff no.2 examined himself as PW1 and plaintiff no.3 examined herself as PW2.

They have their chief affidavits in lieu of their examination-in-chief. On perusal of the same would show that they reiterated the contents of the plaint.

Plaintiffs also exhibited Exs.A1 to A5. Ex.A1 is the death certificate of Late Sri

Shaik Kabeer Das.

9.Plaintiffs also exhibited Ex.A2 to A5 are the Aadhar cards of plaintiff no.1 to 3 and Late Sri Shaik Kabeer Das. It is to be noted that since the defendants were set exparte, the evidence of PW1 remained unchallenged and un-rebuttable and further no objections received from any corner to the publication issued by the plaintiffs.

10.Thus, the oral evidence of PW1 coupled with the documentary evidence vide Exs.A1 to A5 proves that the plaintiffs are the legal heirs of Late

Sri Shaik Kabeer Das and as such, the plaintiffs are entitled to declare them as the legal heirs. This point is answered accordingly.

11. Point No.2:-

In the result, the suit is decreed declaring the plaintiffs no.1 to 3 as the legal heirs of the deceased Late Sri Shaik Kabeer Das. No costs.

Typed to my dictation, corrected and pronounced by me in the Open court on this the 19 thday of September, 2024.

II Addl. Junior Civil Judge-cum-

Judicial Magistrate of First Class

At Kushaiguda

II JCJ

OS No. 668 /202 4

II JCJ-cum-JMFC

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

WITNESSES EXAMINED

For Plaintiff: For Defendant:

PW1: S.Shiva Rama Krishna -Nil- PW2: S.Anjani Devi

EXHIBITS MARKED:

For Plaintiff:

Ex.A1: is the Death certificate of Late Sri Shaik Kabeer Das S/o.Late Shaik

Nagoor Saheb dated 17.03.2024

Ex.A2 : is the Aadhar card of plaintiff no.1

Ex.A3 : is the Aadhar card of plaintiff no.2

Ex.A4 : is the Aadhar card of plaintiff no.3

Ex.A5 : is the Aadhar card of deceased Late Sri Shaik Kabeer Das S/o.Late

Shaik Nagoor Saheb

For Defendant: - Nil -

II Addl. Junior Civil Judge-cum-

Judicial Magistrate of First Class

At Kushaiguda

II JCJ

OS No. 668 /202 4

II JCJ-cum-JMFC

DECREE IN ORIGINAL SUIT

IN THE COURT OF THE II ADDL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE-CUM-JUDICIAL

MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS, AT KUSHAIGUDA.

PRESENT: SMT. P. DEVI MANASA II Addl. Junior Civil Judge-cum-Judicial

Magistrate of First Class at Kushaiguda.

Thursday, this the 19 th day of September, 2024

Original Suit No.668 of 2024

Between:

1.Smt.Shanthi Matha Shaik W/o.Late Kabeer Das Shaik Aged about : 74 years, Occ : Housewife, R/o.H.No.6-2-26, Keesara Dayara, Keesara Mandal, Medchal-Malkajgiri District, Telangana State – 501 301

2.Smt.Shaik Anjani Devi W/o.Shaik Sekhar Babu D/o.Late Kabeer Das Shaik, Aged about : 46 years, Occ : Housewife, R/o.H.No.6-2-26, Keesara Dayara, Keesara Mandal, Medchal-Malkajgiri District, Telangana State – 501 301

3.Sri Shaik Shiva Rama Krishna S/o.Late Kabeer Das Shaik Aged about : 43 years, Occ : Pvt Employee, R/o.H.No.6-2-26, Keesara Dayara, Keesara Mandal, Medchal-Malkajgiri District,

Telangana State – 501 301 ........Plaintiffs

// A n d //

1.The Tahsildhar, Keesara Mandal, Medchal Malkajgiri District, Telangana State – 501 301

2.All concerned ..…..Defendants

Claim: This Suit is filed for declaration to declare plaintiffs No.1 to 3 as the legal heirs of deceased Late Sri Shaik Kabeer Das

Cause of Action: The Cause of action for the suit arose on 17.03.2024 when the deceased Late Sri Shaik Kabeer Das S/o.Late sri Shaik Nagoor Saheb died leaving behind him the plaintiffs as his legal heirs and on 13.06.2024 when the plaintiffs

II JCJ

OS No. 668 /202 4

II JCJ-cum-JMFC approached the defendant no.1 for obtaining legal heir certificate and the cause of action is still subsisting.

Valuation: The value of the suit for the purpose of court fee and jurisdiction is notionally valued at Rs.1,00,000/- on which a court fee of Rs.3,426/- is herewith paid under Sec.24(d) of APCF and SV Act which is sufficient.

Suit presented on: 26.06.2024Suit numbered on: 06.07.2024

This suit came before me for final hearing on 21-08-2024 in the presence of M/s.P.P.Raju, Advocate for Plaintiffs and the defendants set exparte and the matter having stood over for consideration, till this day, this court delivered the following:- 1). That the Suit of Plaintiffs be and the same is hereby Decreed.

2). That plaintiff no.1 to 3 are the legal heirs of deceased Late Sri Shaik Kabeer Das 3). That there is an order as no costs of the suit.

Given under my hand and the seal of this Court on this the day of 19 th day of September, 2024.

II Addl. Junior Civil Judge-cum-

Judicial Magistrate of First Class

At Kushaiguda

COSTS OF THE SUIT

For Plaintiff For Defendants

1. Stamps on PlaintRs. 3,426-00Rs. -

2. Stamps on Vakalat Rs. 2-00Ex-parte

3. Stamps on Process Rs. 70-00Rs. -

4. Advocate FeeMC and FC not filed.

5. Publication ChargesRs. -Rs.-

6. Miscellaneous Rs.-Rs.- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------- TOTAL Rs. 3,498-00 Rs. - ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

II Addl. Junior Civil Judge-cum-

Judicial Magistrate of First Class

At Kushaiguda

II JCJ

OS No. 60 /202 4

II JCJ-cum-JMFC

IN THE COURT OF THE II ADDL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE-CUM-JUDICIAL

MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS, AT KUSHAIGUDA.

PRESENT: SMT. P. DEVI MANASA II Addl. Junior Civil Judge-cum-Judicial

Magistrate of First Class at Kushaiguda.

Thursday, this the 19 th day of September, 2024

Original Suit No.60 of 2024

Between:

1.R.Sarala Devi W/o.Late Raje Lal, Age : 89 years, Occ : Household

2.R.Vinod Kumar S/o.Late Raje Lal, Age : 69 years, Occ : Business

3.Pardesi Satish Kumar S/o.Late Raje Lal Age : 57 years, Occ : Business

4.Meera Devi D/o.Late Raje Lal Age : 63 years, Occ : Household

5.Saritha Devi D/o.Late Raje Lal Age : 55 years, Occ : Household

6.Shobha Devi D/o.Late Raje Lal Age : 47 years, Occ : Household

7.Rajelal Jawahar Lal S/o.Late Raje Lal Age : 54 years, Occ : Business

All the above R/o.H.No.31-12/1, R.K.Puram,

Neredmet, Malkajgiri, Medchal-Malkajgiri District ........Plaintiffs

// A n d //

1.The Mandal Revenue Officer, Malkajgiri Mandal, Medchal Malkajgiri District

2.All concerned ..…..Defendants

This suit came before me for final hearing on 21-08-2024 in the presence of M/s.S.K.Ahmed Shareef, Advocate for Plaintiffs and the defendants set exparte and the matter having stood over for consideration, till this day, this court delivered the following:-

II JCJ

OS No. 60 /202 4

II JCJ-cum-JMFC

J U D G M E N T

1.This suit is filed by the plaintiffs praying this court to declare them as legal heirs of deceased Late Sri Raje Lal, in the interests of Justice.

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

Plaintiff no.1 is wife and plaintiff no.2 to 7 are the children of deceased Late Sri Raje Lal who died on 07.05.2012 leaving behind plaintiffs no.1 to 7 herein as his surviving legal heirs.

3.It is submitted that plaintiffs no.1 to 7 require legal heir certificate for their future use. As such the plaintiffs approached defendant no.1 to declare the plaintiffs as the only surviving legal heirs of deceased Late Sri Raje Lal for which the defendant no.1 refused the request and orally advised to approach the Hon’ble Court for obtaining legal heir certificate. Left with no other alternative, plaintiffs filed this suit.

4.Defendant No.1 was set exparte on 03.04.2024. Plaintiffs issued publication in respect of Defendant No.2 in daily newspaper but none appeared

before the court and filed any objections. Hence, the defendant No.2 is set

exparte.

5.In support of their case, the plaintiff no.3 is examined as PW1 and got marked Exs.A1 to A8.

6.Heard the learned counsel for the plaintiffs.

7.Now the points for consideration are:-

1. Whether the plaintiffs are entitled to declare themselves as legal heirs of Late Sri Raje Lal?

2. To what relief?

II JCJ

OS No. 60 /202 4

II JCJ-cum-JMFC

8. Point No.1:- To substantiate the case of the plaintiffs, Plaintiff plaintiff no.3 examined himself as PW1. He filed his chief affidavit in lieu of his examination-in-chief. On perusal of the same would show that he reiterated the contents of the plaint. Plaintiffs also exhibited Exs.A1 to A9. Ex.A1 is the death certificate of Late Sri Raje Lal.

9.Plaintiffs also exhibited Ex.A2 to A8 are the Aadhar cards of plaintiff no.1 to 7. It is to be noted that since the defendants were set exparte, the evidence of PW1 remained unchallenged and un-rebuttable and further no objections received from any corner to the publication issued by the plaintiffs.

10.Thus, the oral evidence of PW1 coupled with the documentary evidence vide Exs.A1 to A8 proves that the plaintiffs are the legal heirs of Late

Sri Raje Lal and as such, the plaintiffs are entitled to declare them as the legal heirs. This point is answered accordingly.

11. Point No.2:-

In the result, the suit is decreed declaring the plaintiffs no.1 to 7 as the legal heirs of the deceased Late Sri Raje Lal. No costs.

Typed to my dictation, corrected and pronounced by me in the Open court on this the 19 thday of September, 2024.

II Addl. Junior Civil Judge-cum-

Judicial Magistrate of First Class

At Kushaiguda

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

WITNESSES EXAMINED

For Plaintiff: For Defendant:

PW1: P.Satish Kumar -Nil-

II JCJ

OS No. 60 /202 4

II JCJ-cum-JMFC

EXHIBITS MARKED:

For Plaintiff:

Ex.A1: is the Death certificate of Late Sri Raje Lal, Dt.07.05.2012

Ex.A2 : is the Aadhar card of plaintiff no.1

Ex.A3 : is the Aadhar card of plaintiff no.2

Ex.A4 : is the Aadhar card of plaintiff no.3

Ex.A5 : is the Aadhar card of plaintiff no.4

Ex.A6 : is the Aadhar card of plaintiff no.5

Ex.A7 : is the Aadhar card of plaintiff no.6

Ex.A8 : is the Aadhar card of plaintiff no.7

For Defendant: - Nil -

II Addl. Junior Civil Judge-cum-

Judicial Magistrate of First Class

At Kushaiguda

II JCJ

OS No. 60 /202 4

II JCJ-cum-JMFC

DECREE IN ORIGINAL SUIT

IN THE COURT OF THE II ADDL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE-CUM-JUDICIAL

MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS, AT KUSHAIGUDA.

PRESENT: SMT. P. DEVI MANASA II Addl. Junior Civil Judge-cum-Judicial

Magistrate of First Class at Kushaiguda.

Thursday, this the 19 th day of September, 2024

Original Suit No.60 of 2024

Between:

1.R.Sarala Devi W/o.Late Raje Lal, Age : 89 years, Occ : Household

2.R.Vinod Kumar S/o.Late Raje Lal, Age : 69 years, Occ : Business

3.Pardesi Satish Kumar S/o.Late Raje Lal Age : 57 years, Occ : Business

4.Meera Devi D/o.Late Raje Lal Age : 63 years, Occ : Household

5.Saritha Devi D/o.Late Raje Lal Age : 55 years, Occ : Household

6.Shobha Devi D/o.Late Raje Lal Age : 47 years, Occ : Household

7.Rajelal Jawahar Lal S/o.Late Raje Lal Age : 54 years, Occ : Business

All the above R/o.H.No.31-12/1, R.K.Puram,

Neredmet, Malkajgiri, Medchal-Malkajgiri District ........Plaintiffs

// A n d //

1.The Mandal Revenue Officer, Malkajgiri Mandal, Medchal Malkajgiri District

2.All concerned ..…..Defendants

II JCJ

OS No. 60 /202 4

II JCJ-cum-JMFC

Claim: This Suit is filed for declaration to declare plaintiffs No.1 to 7 as the legal heirs of deceased Late Sri Raje Lal.

Cause of Action: The Cause of action arose for the first time on 07.05.2012 when Late Raje Lal died and thereafter the cause of action arose on 04.12.2023, when the plaintiff approached the MRO, Neredmet for issuance of legal heir certificate and he denied the same, the cause of action subsists till the plaintiff declare as legal heir of Late Sri Raje Lal

Valuation: The suit for declaration of the legal character / status of the plaintiff s are legal heirs of Late Raje Lal and the plaintiffs notionally value the present suit at Rs.1,00,000/- for which fixed court fee of Rs.3,426/- is paid under Section 24-D of TSCF and SV Act and the same is sufficient.

Suit presented on: 29.12.2023Suit numbered on: 20.01.2024

This suit came before me for final hearing on 21-08-2024 in the presence of M/s.S.K.Ahmed Shareef, and the defendants set exparte and the matter having stood over for consideration, till this day, this court delivered the following:- 1). That the Suit of Plaintiffs be and the same is hereby Decreed.

2). That plaintiff no.1 to 7 are the legal heirs of deceased Late Sri Raje Lal 3). That there is an order as no costs of the suit. Given under my hand and the seal of this Court on this the day of 19 th day of September, 2024.

II Addl. Junior Civil Judge-cum-

Judicial Magistrate of First Class

At Kushaiguda

COSTS OF THE SUIT

For Plaintiff For Defendants

1. Stamps on PlaintRs. 3,426-00Rs. -

2. Stamps on Vakalat Rs. 2-00Ex-parte

3. Stamps on Process Rs. 70-00Rs. -

4. Advocate FeeMC and FC not filed.

5. Publication ChargesRs. -Rs.-

6. Miscellaneous Rs.-Rs.- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------- TOTAL Rs. 3,498-00 Rs. - ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

II Addl. Junior Civil Judge-cum-

Judicial Magistrate of First Class

At Kushaiguda

II JCJ

C.C.No.519 of 2017 Page No.1

IN THE COURT OF VII ADDITIONAL METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE: MEDCHAL

MALKAJGIRI DISTRICT: AT MEDCHAL

PRESENT:- SMT. P.DEVI MANASA

VII ADDITIONAL METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE,

AT MEDCHAL.

WEDNESDAY, THIS THE 2nd DAY OF AUGUST 2023

C.C.NO. 519 OF 2017

Between :

The State represented through the Sub-Inspector of police P.S. Shameerpet. ….Complainant.

// A n d //

Yamjala Naveen S/o. Shankaraiah, aged about 31 years, Caste:Mudiraj, Occ:Driver, R/o. Adrasapally Village, Shamirpet Mandal, Medchal District.

....Accused

This case came before me for final hearing on 01.08.2023 in the presence of Learned Additional Public Prosecutor and of Sri. B.Jayaramulu, Counsel for accused and the matter having stood over for consideration, till this day, this court made the following :-

J U D G M E N T

1. This is a case filed by Sub Inspector of police, P.S. Shameerpet against the accused for the offence punishable under Section 420, 379 IPC.

2.The brief facts of the prosecution are that: On 28.04.2017 on reliable information about illegal running of sand filters and transportation of artificial sand at Adraspally village, Pw3

Pw5 and Lw4 went to spot and found accused running sand filters for preparation of artificial sand in government land and transporting it for benefits, Later Pw5 conducted panchanama in the presence of mediators.

3.Basing on the panchanama Lw6 police registered a case in Cr.No.155/2017 U/Sec.

Section 420, 379 IPC . During the course of investigation, recorded the statements. On 01.05.2017 issued 41 .A Cr.P.C notice. After completion of investigation, filed charge sheet.

C.C.No.519 of 2017 Page No.2

4.The case was taken on file against the accused for the offence punishable under

Section 420,379 IPC The copies of documents was furnished to the accused as contemplated under Section 207 of Cr.P.C.

5.On appearance of the Accused he was examined under section 239 of Cr.P.C, read over and explained the contents of it to the accused for the offence under section 420, 379

IPC .He denied the offence, pleaded not guilty and claim to be tried.

6.To prove the case of prosecution, examined PW.1 to PW.5 and Exs.P.1 to P.7 are marked as documents on behalf of prosecution.

7.After completion of prosecution side evidence, the accused are examined under section 313 of Cr.P.C by explaining the available incriminating material against to him, for which he denied the same and reported no defence evidence.

8.Heard arguments of both sides.

9.Now, the point that arises for determination is:-

“Whether the prosecution has proved the guilt of the accused for the offence

punishable U/sec.420, 379 IPC ?”.

10.Point: In order to prove its case, the prosecution examined police constable who assisted investigating officer as PW.3 and Eye witness as Pw4,The panch witnesses are examined as PW.1 and Pw2 .The investigating officer is examined as Pw5.

11.The panch witnesses deposed that nothing was seized in their presence. No panchanama was conducted in their presence,. The learned APP has cross examined the witnesses but nothing could be elicited in favour of prosecution. The learned counsel for accused had reported cross examination as Nil. Now coming to evidence of PW.3 and PW5 he testified about conducting of panchanama in the presence of Pw1 and Pw2. The investigating officer testified in lines of report filed by him.

C.C.No.519 of 2017 Page No.3

12. This court carefully scrutinized the evidence on record. The case of prosecution is that on 28.04.2017 Pw3 and Lw4 along with Pw5 visited spot and found Accused running sand filters illegally for preparation of artificial sand,Immediately PW5 conducted panchanama.

13.To prove the panchanama prosecution examined PW.1 and Pw2 who acted as mediators for panchanama, Wherein PW.1 and Pw2 deposed no panchanama was conducted and nothing is seized in their presence.

14.The evidence of police officials i.e., PW.3 and Pw5 are available on record to prove the running of sand filters illegally for preparation of artificial sand and transportation of same. However, No document is filed to show accused were running sand filters illegally in government land.

In the present case the accused is alleged to be committed theft of sand and the prosecution has to prove the following ingredients U/s 379 IPC i.e (1) Dishonest intention to take property; (2) The property must be movable: (3) The property should be taken out of the possession of another person; (4) The property should be taken without the consent of that person; (5) There must be some moving of the property in order to accomplish the taking of it. In the present case there eye witnesses is examined as Pw4 to prove the fact that the accused has dishonest intention to take the sand from adraspally village

However he did not support the case of prosecution, the prosecution in order to prove that accused have stolen the sand and is in possession of the same illegally,has examined panchas. However the panchas for panchanama have not supported the case of prosecution and deposed that there was no seizure. In this circumstances the prosecution failed to prove the primary ingredients in order to attract the offence U/s 379 IPC. Now coming to accusation u/s 420 IPC no victim is examined as to ascertain who was deceived by acts of accused.

Hence charge u/s 420 IPC remains unproved.

15.Therefore, this court is of opinion that reliance on the evidence of investigating officer alone is not safe to prove the panchanama i.e,running the sand illegally for preparation of artificial sand and transportation of same. Therefore, for these reasons, this court is afraid to

C.C.No.519 of 2017 Page No.4 place reliance on evidence of PW.3, PW5. Therefore for the foregoing reasons stated supra, this court holds that prosecution failed to prove the guilt of the accused.

16. In The Result, Accused is found not guilty for the offence punishable U/s 420, 379 of

IPC and are acquitted under Section 248(1) of Cr.P.C. The bail bonds of accused shall stands cancelled after expiry of appeal time.

Prepared and pronounced by me in the open court on this the 2nd day of August,2023

Sd/-

VII Addl. Metropolitan Magistrate Medchal

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

WITNESSES EXAMINED

For Prosecution: PW-1: Sripathi Mahesh/ Panch witness for scene and confession cum seizure PW-2: Pathi Yadagiri/ Panch witness for scene and confession cum seizure PW-3: Upachary P.C.No.2881/ Witness and assisted the I.O PW-4: Vanga Venkat Reddy/ Eyewitness PW-5: A.Naveen Reddy, S.I of police/Investigating officer For Defence: -None-

EXHIBITS MARKED

For Prosecution: Ex.P1 is the signature of PW-1 on the confession panchanama of accused Ex.P2 is the signature of scene of offene panchanama Ex.P3 is the Signature of PW-2 on panchanama Ex.P4 is the Signature of PW-2 on scene of offence panchanama Ex.P5 is the 161 Cr.P.C statement of PW-4 Ex.P6 is the FIR Ex.P7 is the Scene of offence panchanama For Defence: Nil

MATERIAL OBJECTS IF ANY

- Nil -

Sd/-

VII ADDITIONAL METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE,

MEDCHAL.

C.C.No.519 of 2017 Page No.5

IN THE COURT OF THE PRINCIPAL JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE-CUM-VII

ADDITIONAL METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE: AT MEDCHAL

CALENDAR CASE No. 519 of 2017

1. Date of offence : 28.04.2017

2. Date of Complaint : 28.04.2017

3. Date of Apprehension: 28.04.2017

4. Commencement of Trial : 10.03.2020

5. Closure of Trial : 31.07.2023

6. Date of Judgment: 02.08.2023

7. Complaint : P.S. Shameerpet

8. Name of the accused : Yamjala Naveen S/o. Shankaraiah, aged about 31 years, Caste:Mudiraj, Occ:Driver, R/o. Adrasapally Village, Shamirpet Mandal, Medchal District.

9. Offence :: U/s. 420 and 379 of IPC

10. Finding of the Court : Found not guilty

11. Result : In The Result, Accused is found not guilty for the offence punishable U/s 420, 379 of IPC and are acquitted under Section 248(1) of Cr.P.C. The bail bonds of accused shall stands cancelled after expiry of appeal time.

VII ADDITIONAL METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE,

MEDCHAL.

C.C.No.519 of 2017 Page No.1

IN THE COURT OF VII ADDITIONAL METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE: MEDCHAL

MALKAJGIRI DISTRICT: AT MEDCHAL

PRESENT:- SMT. P.DEVI MANASA

VII ADDITIONAL METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE,

AT MEDCHAL.

WEDNESDAY, THIS THE 2nd DAY OF AUGUST 2023

C.C.NO. 519 OF 2017

Between :

The State represented through the Sub-Inspector of police P.S. Shameerpet. ….Complainant.

// A n d //

Yamjala Naveen S/o. Shankaraiah, aged about 31 years, Caste:Mudiraj, Occ:Driver, R/o. Adrasapally Village, Shamirpet Mandal, Medchal District.

....Accused

This case came before me for final hearing on 01.08.2023 in the presence of Learned Additional Public Prosecutor and of Sri. B.Jayaramulu, Counsel for accused and the matter having stood over for consideration, till this day, this court made the following :-

J U D G M E N T

1. This is a case filed by Sub Inspector of police, P.S. Shameerpet against the accused for the offence punishable under Section 420, 379 IPC.

2.The brief facts of the prosecution are that: On 28.04.2017 on reliable information about illegal running of sand filters and transportation of artificial sand at Adraspally village, Pw3

Pw5 and Lw4 went to spot and found accused running sand filters for preparation of artificial sand in government land and transporting it for benefits, Later Pw5 conducted panchanama in the presence of mediators.

3.Basing on the panchanama Lw6 police registered a case in Cr.No.155/2017 U/Sec.

Section 420, 379 IPC . During the course of investigation, recorded the statements. On 01.05.2017 issued 41 .A Cr.P.C notice. After completion of investigation, filed charge sheet.

C.C.No.519 of 2017 Page No.2

4.The case was taken on file against the accused for the offence punishable under

Section 420,379 IPC The copies of documents was furnished to the accused as contemplated under Section 207 of Cr.P.C.

5.On appearance of the Accused he was examined under section 239 of Cr.P.C, read over and explained the contents of it to the accused for the offence under section 420, 379

IPC .He denied the offence, pleaded not guilty and claim to be tried.

6.To prove the case of prosecution, examined PW.1 to PW.5 and Exs.P.1 to P.7 are marked as documents on behalf of prosecution.

7.After completion of prosecution side evidence, the accused are examined under section 313 of Cr.P.C by explaining the available incriminating material against to him, for which he denied the same and reported no defence evidence.

8.Heard arguments of both sides.

9.Now, the point that arises for determination is:-

“Whether the prosecution has proved the guilt of the accused for the offence

punishable U/sec.420, 379 IPC ?”.

10.Point: In order to prove its case, the prosecution examined police constable who assisted investigating officer as PW.3 and Eye witness as Pw4,The panch witnesses are examined as PW.1 and Pw2 .The investigating officer is examined as Pw5.

11.The panch witnesses deposed that nothing was seized in their presence. No panchanama was conducted in their presence,. The learned APP has cross examined the witnesses but nothing could be elicited in favour of prosecution. The learned counsel for accused had reported cross examination as Nil. Now coming to evidence of PW.3 and PW5 he testified about conducting of panchanama in the presence of Pw1 and Pw2. The investigating officer testified in lines of report filed by him.

C.C.No.519 of 2017 Page No.3

12. This court carefully scrutinized the evidence on record. The case of prosecution is that on 28.04.2017 Pw3 and Lw4 along with Pw5 visited spot and found Accused running sand filters illegally for preparation of artificial sand,Immediately PW5 conducted panchanama.

13.To prove the panchanama prosecution examined PW.1 and Pw2 who acted as mediators for panchanama, Wherein PW.1 and Pw2 deposed no panchanama was conducted and nothing is seized in their presence.

14.The evidence of police officials i.e., PW.3 and Pw5 are available on record to prove the running of sand filters illegally for preparation of artificial sand and transportation of same. However, No document is filed to show accused were running sand filters illegally in government land.

In the present case the accused is alleged to be committed theft of sand and the prosecution has to prove the following ingredients U/s 379 IPC i.e (1) Dishonest intention to take property; (2) The property must be movable: (3) The property should be taken out of the possession of another person; (4) The property should be taken without the consent of that person; (5) There must be some moving of the property in order to accomplish the taking of it. In the present case there eye witnesses is examined as Pw4 to prove the fact that the accused has dishonest intention to take the sand from adraspally village

However he did not support the case of prosecution, the prosecution in order to prove that accused have stolen the sand and is in possession of the same illegally,has examined panchas. However the panchas for panchanama have not supported the case of prosecution and deposed that there was no seizure. In this circumstances the prosecution failed to prove the primary ingredients in order to attract the offence U/s 379 IPC. Now coming to accusation u/s 420 IPC no victim is examined as to ascertain who was deceived by acts of accused.

Hence charge u/s 420 IPC remains unproved.

15.Therefore, this court is of opinion that reliance on the evidence of investigating officer alone is not safe to prove the panchanama i.e,running the sand illegally for preparation of artificial sand and transportation of same. Therefore, for these reasons, this court is afraid to

C.C.No.519 of 2017 Page No.4 place reliance on evidence of PW.3, PW5. Therefore for the foregoing reasons stated supra, this court holds that prosecution failed to prove the guilt of the accused.

16. In The Result, Accused is found not guilty for the offence punishable U/s 420, 379 of

IPC and are acquitted under Section 248(1) of Cr.P.C. The bail bonds of accused shall stands cancelled after expiry of appeal time.

Prepared and pronounced by me in the open court on this the 2nd day of August,2023

Sd/-

VII Addl. Metropolitan Magistrate Medchal

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

WITNESSES EXAMINED

For Prosecution: PW-1: Sripathi Mahesh/ Panch witness for scene and confession cum seizure PW-2: Pathi Yadagiri/ Panch witness for scene and confession cum seizure PW-3: Upachary P.C.No.2881/ Witness and assisted the I.O PW-4: Vanga Venkat Reddy/ Eyewitness PW-5: A.Naveen Reddy, S.I of police/Investigating officer For Defence: -None-

EXHIBITS MARKED

For Prosecution: Ex.P1 is the signature of PW-1 on the confession panchanama of accused Ex.P2 is the signature of scene of offene panchanama Ex.P3 is the Signature of PW-2 on panchanama Ex.P4 is the Signature of PW-2 on scene of offence panchanama Ex.P5 is the 161 Cr.P.C statement of PW-4 Ex.P6 is the FIR Ex.P7 is the Scene of offence panchanama For Defence: Nil

MATERIAL OBJECTS IF ANY

- Nil -

Sd/-

VII ADDITIONAL METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE,

MEDCHAL.

C.C.No.519 of 2017 Page No.5

IN THE COURT OF THE PRINCIPAL JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE-CUM-VII

ADDITIONAL METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE: AT MEDCHAL

CALENDAR CASE No. 519 of 2017

1. Date of offence : 28.04.2017

2. Date of Complaint : 28.04.2017

3. Date of Apprehension: 28.04.2017

4. Commencement of Trial : 10.03.2020

5. Closure of Trial : 31.07.2023

6. Date of Judgment: 02.08.2023

7. Complaint : P.S. Shameerpet

8. Name of the accused : Yamjala Naveen S/o. Shankaraiah, aged about 31 years, Caste:Mudiraj, Occ:Driver, R/o. Adrasapally Village, Shamirpet Mandal, Medchal District.

9. Offence :: U/s. 420 and 379 of IPC

10. Finding of the Court : Found not guilty

11. Result : In The Result, Accused is found not guilty for the offence punishable U/s 420, 379 of IPC and are acquitted under Section 248(1) of Cr.P.C. The bail bonds of accused shall stands cancelled after expiry of appeal time.

VII ADDITIONAL METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE,

MEDCHAL.