Sri P.R.Rajeev

Addl. Senior Civil Judge, Machilipatnam

Prl District Courts, Machilipatnam · Krishna · Andhra Pradesh

Sri P.R.Rajeev, Addl. Senior Civil Judge, Machilipatnam, is posted at Prl District Courts, Machilipatnam, Krishna, Andhra Pradesh, India. 623 court orders on record since 2015. 10 judgments with full text available. Primarily handles EP, OS, SC cases.

623

Total Orders

Judgments

Orders/Month

Postings

Featured Judgments

OS/261/2007

Valavala Satyanarayana vs Penumatcha Sarojini

27 Mar 2017

IN THE COURT OF ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE :MACHILIPATNAM.

Present: Sri P.R.Rajeev, Secretary, DLSA, FAC/Addl. Senior Civil Judge, Machilipatnam Monday, the 27th day of March, 2017

OS.No.261/2007

Between:

Valavala Satyanarayana, S/o.Venkata Subba Rao @ Subba Rao, Hindu, aged about 50 years, properties, R/o.Komallapudi, Kruthivennu Mandal, Krishna District, JCJC Bantumilli. … Plaintiff

And

1.Penumatsa Sarojini, W/o.late Gopala Raju, Hindu, aged about 63 years, properties and Housewife, R/o.Marridibba, Chirivellapalem (v), Machilipatnam Mandal, Krishna District, JCJC Machilipatnam.

2.Penumatsa Subba Raju, S/o.late Gopala Raju, Hindu, aged about 43 years, properties, cultivation and acqua-culture, R/o.Marridibba, Chirivellapalem (v), Machilipatnam Mandal, Krishna District, JCJC Machilipatnam.

3.Penumatsa Seetharama Raju, S/o.late Gopala Raju, Hindu, aged about 40 years, properties, cultivation and acqua-culture, R/o.Marridibba, Chirivellapalem (v), Machilipatnam Mandal, Krishna District, JCJC Machilipatnam.

4.Vegesina Annapurna, W/o.Ravindra Varma, Hindu, aged about 36 years, Housewife, R/o.Yanamalakuduru, Vijayawada, now at Marridibba, Chirivellapalem (v), Machilipatnam Mandal, Krishna District, JCJC Machilipatnam. …Defendants

This suit coming on this day before me for final hearing in the presence of Sri.K.Chandra Sekhara Rao, Advocate for plaintiff and Sri.V.L.Satyanarayana, Advocate for the defendant No.2 and the defendants 1, 3 & 4 having remained Ex-parte 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. The plaintiff seeking recovery of suit claim along with interest and costs on the strength of promissory note said to have been executed by the deceased

Penumatsa Gopala Raju.

2. The plaint averments are as follows.

The husband of the 1st defendant and father of the defendant Nos.2, 3 & 4 namely Penumatsa Gopala Raju (deceased) borrowed an amount of Rs.6,50,000/- from the plaintiff on 10.03.2005 for the purpose of his business and for his cheruvu kharchula nimittamu and on the same day he executed a suit promissory note in favour of the plaintiff agreeing to repay the same together with interest @18% p.a., subsequently in spite of repeated demands made by the plaintiff during the life time of Penumatsa Gopala Raju and after his demise his legal heirs defendants 1 to 4 failed to discharge the amount due under the promissory note. The plaintiff got issued a registered notice dt.29.08.2007 to defendants demanding them to discharge the amount due under the suit promissory note and the defendants refused to receive the notice. Hence, the suit.

3. The defendant No.2 resisted the claim of the plaintiff by filing his written statement and contended that he denied the material allegations mentioned in the plaint except the relationship and he is not aware of the alleged promissory note transaction between the plaintiff and the deceased Gopala Raju and while the life time of Gopala Raju he never informed the same to this defendant and the deceased

Gopala Raju has no necessity to borrow such huge amount for the purpose of his business “cheruvu Kharchula nimittamu” and the said Gopala Raju is not a businessman. This defendant further stated that he does not know the attester and scribe of the alleged suit promissory note and there is no facial acquaintance with them. This defendant contended that he never refused the register notice as stated by the plaintiff in the plaint and as per the knowledge of this defendant the suit promissory note was never executed by late Gopala Raju and this defendant believes that the plaintiff with the assistance of attester and scribe, fabricated the suit promissory note and forged the signature of late Gopala Raju with a fraudulent intention and defame of the family of late Gopala Raju. This defendant further contended that he is not succeeded to the estate of the deceased Gopala Raju as alleged by the plaintiff because he was got separated from the family after his marriage during the lifetime of the deceased Gopala Raju. On this ground alone the suit is not maintainable against this defendant and the suit is liable to be dismissed. This defendant contended that the plaintiff filed the suit only to cause wrongful gain to himself and to cause wrongful loss to this defendant and hence prayed for dismissal of the suit.

4. The defendants Nos.1, 3 and 4 are remained exparte.

5. Basing on the respective pleadings of both the parties to the suit, the following issues are settled by my learned predecessor.

1.Whether the borrowing and execution of suit promissory note by late Gopala

Raju ?

2.Whether the suit promissory note is forged and fabricated with the aid of scribe and attesters ?

3.Whether the plaintiff is entitled for the suit amount ?

6. Plaintiff examined himself as P.W.1 and marked Exs.A.1 to A.3. While the suit is coming for cross-examination of PW.1 the defendant No.2 called absent and giving number of opportunities to the defendant No.2 for cross-examination of

PW.1. On 20.03.2017 this court called the defendant No.2 and he was called absent and remained experte. The other defendants remained exparte.

7. Heard the learned counsel for the plaintiff.

8. Now the point for consideration is:

“Whether the plaintiff is entitled for the suit claim or not?”

POINT:

9. The plaintiff seeking recovery of suit claim along with the interest and costs basing on the suit promissory note dt.10.03.2005 executed by the deceased

Penumatsa Gopala Raju from the defendants who being the legal heirs of the deceased Penumatsa Gopala Raju, in view of the death of the original borrower and the estate left behind by the original borrower devolved upon the defendants. The plaintiff in order to substantiate the suit claim examined himself as Pw.1 and got marked Ex.A.1 to Ex.A3, the evidence of the plaintiff coupled with the documents relied upon shows that, deceased Penumatsa Gopala Raju who being the husband of the 1st defendant and father of the other defendants borrowed a sum of Rs.6,50,000/- from the plaintiff in order to discharge his business and fish tanks expenses purpose and on the same day having received the consideration executed the suit promissory note dt.10.03.2005 in favour of the plaintiff agreeing to repay the same together with interest @ 18% p.a., subsequently inspite of repeated demands made by the plaintiff during life time of Penumatsa Gopala Raju and after his demise his legal heirs who are the defendants 1 to 4 failed to discharge the amount due under the suit promissory note. The plaintiff got issued registered legal notice dt.29.08.2007 to the defendants demanding them to discharge the amount due under the suit promissory note as the estate left behind by the Penumatsa Gopala Raju devolved upon the defendants, but the defendants kept quite. It is also not in dispute that the defendants are the legal heirs of deceased Penumatsa Gopala Raju and the estate left behind him devolved upon them. The oral and documentary evidence relied upon by the plaintiff established the suit claim.

10. The evidence of Pw.1 has remained unchallenged, as the defendants remained ex-parte. The evidence of Pw.1 supported by Exs.A.1 to A.3 proves the suit claim. Accordingly, this point is answered in favour of the plaintiff and against the defendant.

11. In the result, the suit is decreed with costs in favour of the plaintiff against the defendants and the defendants are directed to pay a sum of Rs.9,55,704/- together with interest @ 12% p.a., from the date of suit till the date of decree and thereafter @ 6% p.a., till realization on principal amount of Rs.6,50,000/- from out of the estate left behind by the deceased Penumatsa Gopala Raju.

Dictated to the Stenographer, transcribed by him, corrected and pronounced

by me, in the open court, this the 27th day of March, 2017.

Secretary, DLSA, Machilipatnam FAC/ADDL. SENIOR CIVILJUDGE,

MACHILIPATNAM.

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

ORAL EVIDENCE

For plaintiff For defendants PW1: V.Satyanarayana None

DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE

For Plaintiff:

Ex.A1 : Promissory note dt.10.03.2005 executed by the deceased Gopala Raju. Ex.A2 : Office copy of legal notice dt.29.08.2007. Ex.A3 : Returned postal cover.

For Defendants: ----NIL----

Secretary, DLSA, Machilipatnam FAC/ADDL. SENIOR CIVILJUDGE,

MACHILIPATNAM.

OS/243/2012

Adapala Bapana Rao vs Adapal Vijayalakshmi and others

19 Oct 2016

//1//

IN THE COURT OF ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE

MACHILIPATNAM.

Present:Sri.P.R.RAJEEV,

Secretary, DLSA,

FAC/Addl.Senior Civil Judge, Machilipatnam,

This the 19th day of October, 2016

O.S No.243/2012

Between: Adapala Bapana Rao, S/o.late Adapala Panduranga Rao, Hindu, aged about 65 years, R/o.D.No.72914, SRT693, Opp.Swamy Talkies, Sanat Nagar, Hyderabad, within the limits of City Civil Courts, Hyderabad. …Plaintiff

and

1.Adapala Vijayalakshmi, W/o.late Sri Kalika Vara Prasad, Hindu, aged about 49 years, house wife, R/o.D.No.20118B/10, Gandhi Nagar, Machilipatnam, JCJC Machilipatnam.

2.Adapala Harish, S/o.late Sri Kalika Vara Prasad, Hindu, aged about 27 years, employee, R/o.Plot No.99, House No.163227, Vasanth Nagar Colony, Hyder Nagar, Kukatpalli, Hyderabad, within the limits of City Civil Courts, Hyderabad.

3.Raavi Asritha, W/o.Swaneeth, Hindu, aged about 24 years, House wife, Daughterinlaw of Raavi Mahankala Rao, R/o.Pattabhipuram, Valandapalem, Machilipatnam, JCJC, Machilipatnam.

4.Adapala Kali Ganesh, S/o.Late Panduranga Rao, C/o.Padisiviganti Anjaneyulu, Hindu, aged about 42 years, unemployed, R/o.D.No.14/883, Edepalli Machilipatnam, JCJC, Machilipatnam.

5.Rasamsetty Naga Hanuman, S/o.Rangaiah, Hindu, aged about 49 years, R/o.D.No.19/435, Circarthota, Machilipatnam, JCJC, Machilipatnam.

6.Rasamsetty Amaleswari, D/o.Naga Hanuman, Hindu, aged about 22 years, student,R/o.D.No.19/435,Circarthota,Machilipatnam,JCJC, Machilipatnam.

7.Rasamsetty Leela Sankar, S/o.Naga Hanuman, Hindu, aged about 20 years, student,R/o.D.No.19/435,Circarthota,Machilipatnam,JCJC, Machilipatnam.

8.Davu Koteswara Rao, S/o.late Venkatadri, Hindu, aged about 65 years, cultivation, R/o.D.No.28/886, Fattullabad, Machilipatnam, JCJC, Machilipatnam.

9.Chintala Sambasiva Rao, S/o.Nancharaiah, Hindu, aged about 45 years, rickshaw puller, R/o.D.No.3/340, Pandrajugudem, Machilipatnam, JCJC, Machilipatnam.

10. Saskeena Begum, W/o.Mirja Raiz Ali, Muslim, aged about 38 years, House wife, R/o.D.No.5/64, Nuruddinpet, Machilipatnam, JCJC, Machilipatnam.

11. Abbasi Begum, W/o.Khasim Baig, Muslim, aged about 39 years, House wife, R/o.D.No.3/128, Varregudem, Machilipatnam, JCJC, Machilipatnam.

12. Davu Lakshmi Kamalamba, W/o.Koteswara Rao, Hindu, aged about 60 years, House wife, R/o.D.No.28/886, Fattullabad, Machilipatnam, JCJC, Machilipatnam.

13. Davu Venkatadri, S/o.Koteswara Rao, Hindu, aged about 35 years, R/o.D.No.28/886, Fattullabad, Machilipatnam, JCJC, Machilipatnam.

//2//

14. Buddiga Srikala, W/o.Mallikharjuna Rao, Hindu, aged about 40 years, House wife, R/o.D.No.28/886, Fattullabad, Machilipatnam, JCJC, Machilipatnam.

15. Palagani Srividya, W/o.Rajasekhar, Hindu, aged about 33 years, House wife, R/o.D.No.28/886, Fattullabad, Machilipatnam, JCJC, Machilipatnam. …Defendants This suit is coming on this day for final hearing before this Court in the presence of Sri.S.Nagadhara Nath, Advocate for the plaintiffs and Sri.S.Balaji Rao, Advocate for defendants No.1 & 4 and the defendants 2,3,5 to 7, 9 to 15 are remained exparte and the defendant No.8 died and the matter having stood over till this day this court delivered the following :

JUDGMENT

This suit filed by the plaintiff praying the court to pass a preliminary decree in favour of the plaintiff and against the defendants for partition of the plaint schedule property firstly into two shares and one such share should be allotted to the plaintiff, as he got the same by his birth and devolved on him in the notional partition with his father and partition the other half of the plaint schedule property into four equal shares according to good and bad qualities by metes and bounds and allot 1/4th share to the plaintiff, with separate possession; award costs of the suit and pass such other relief or reliefs which this Hon’ble Court deems fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. Cause of action for the suit arose, subsequent to the death of the mother of plaintiff, when he was five years old and on the birth of the plaintiff with a right to acquire half of the plaint schedule property and thereafter when the father of the plaintiff married his 2nd wife and begotten the husband of the 1st defendant, the 4th defendant, the wife of the 5th defendant and another daughter Bhuvaneswari who died bachelor and thereafter the plaint schedule property has been keeping in joint possession of the plaintiff and the defendants 1 to 4 and subsequent 2009, when the defendants 1 to 4 resorted to alienation of the plaint schedule property to defendants 8 to 11 and the alleged partition and gift deed in favour of the 3rd defendant and later when the plaintiff came to know of these illegal alienations and called upon the defendants for partition of the plaint schedule property and on 06.08.2012 whne the plaintiff got issued legal notice to the defendants and later the defendants 1 to 4 got issued reply notice to the defendants and later the defendants 1 to 4 got issued reply with false allegations and at Pandrajugudem, Machilipatnam where the plaint schedule property situated and most of the defendants reside, with the jurisdiction of this Court.

2. On receipt of summons, the defendant No.2, 3, 5 to 7, 9 to 15 having remained exparte and the defendant No. 4 filed written statement and it was adopted by the defendant No.1 denying the material averments of the plaintiffs averred in the plaint and the defendant No.8 died.

//3//

3. Basing on the pleadings, the following issues are framed for trial.

i.Whether plaintiff is entitle for partition as prayed for ?

ii.Whether partition already took place during the life time of Panduranga Rao as contended by the defendants ?

iii.To what relief ?

4.In order to establish the claim of the plaintiff the plaintiff filed his chief affidavit and himself examined as Pw.1 and Ex.A1 to Ex.A10 were marked and the learned counsel for the contesting defendants cross examined the plaintiff and the also in order the establish the case of the defendants the defendant No.1 filed chief affidavit and examined herself as Dw.1 and no documents were marked, on the same day the counsel for plaintiff deferred request. The suit was posted for crossexamination of the Dw.1.

5.The counsel for the plaintiff filed memo by not pressing the suit.

Hence, the suit is dismissed without costs as not pressed.

Pronounced by me in the Open Court on this the 19th day of October, 2016.

Secretary, DLSA, FAC/Addl.Senior Civil Judge, Machilipatnam.

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

ORAL EVIDENCE

PlaintiffDefendants Pw.1 : A.BapanaraoDw.1 : A.Vijayalakshmi

DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE

For Plaintiff Ex.A1 :Dt.04.06.1937 Certified copy of registered sale deed in the name of A.Sriramulu Ex.A2 :Dt.28.07.2011 certified copy of registered partition deed. Ex.A3 :Dt.23.05.2009 certified copy of registered gift deed executed by defendants 1 and 2 in favour of D.3. Ex.A4 :Dt.28.07.2011 certified copy of registered sale deed executed by D1 to D3 in favour of D8. Ex.A5 :Dt.06.07.2012 certified copy of registered sale deed executed by D1 to D3 in favour of D10. Ex.A6 :Dt.06.07.2012 certified copy of registered sale deed executed by //4//

D1 to D3 in favour of D11. Ex.A7 :Dt.06.07.2012 certified copy of registered sale deed executed by D1, D2 and D4 in favour of D9. Ex.A8 :Dt.07.08.2012 registered legal notice by plaintiff to defendants Ex.A9 :Dt.12.03.2012 reply notice by D1 to D4. Ex.A10 :Unserved legal notices 3 in number. For Defendants : NIL

Secretary, DLSA, FAC/Addl.Senior Civil Judge, Machilipatnam.

OS/22/2017

Parasa Prakash vs P.V.V.Narasimha swamy

10 Apr 2017

IN THE COURT OF ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE :MACHILIPATNAM.

Present: Sri P.R.Rajeev, Secretary, DLSA, FAC/Addl. Senior Civil Judge, Machilipatnam Monday, the 10th day of April, 2017

OS.No.22/2017

Between: Parasa Prakash, S/o.Venkateswara Rao, Hindu, aged about 38 years, Business, R/o.Pedakaragraharam, Bandar Mandal, Krishna District. … Plaintiff

And

Puli Veera Venkata Narasimha Swamy, S/o.late Veera Raghavaiah, Hindu, aged about 35 years, cultivation, R/o.Chinapandraka, Kruthivennu Mandal, Krishna District. …Defendant This suit coming on this day before me for final hearing in the presence of Sri.S.Nagadhara Nath, Sri.S.B.V.V.N.Malleswara Rao, Sri.M.Naga Prasad and Sri.A.Syam Prasad, Advocates for plaintiff and the defendant having remained Ex-parte 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. The plaintiff is seeking recovery of suit claim along with interest and

costs from the defendant etc.,

2. The plaint averments are as follows.

The defendant borrowed a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- from the plaintiff on 14.03.2013 for the purpose of his agricultural expenses and to discharge his sundry debts and executed the promissory note agreeing to repay the amount with interest @ 24% per annum and in spite of the demands made by the plaintiff, the defendant paid an amount of Rs.20,000/- towards the part-payment of the debt due under the aforesaid promissory note and when the plaintiff asked the security for the loan contracted under the aforesaid promissory note, the defendant with an intention to create equiatable mortgage had deposited his title deed in respect of the plaint schedule property and on 17.12.2016 when the plaintiff got issued registered legal notice to the defendant, called upon him to discharge the mortgage debt and the defendant having received the same, kept. Hence, the suit.

3. Defendant remained ex parte.

4. Plaintiff examined himself as Pw.1 and marked Ex.A.1 to Ex.A.5.

5. Heard the learned counsel for the plaintiff.

6. Now the point for consideration is:

“Whether the plaintiff is entitled for the suit claim or not?”

POINT:

7. In order to substantiate the suit claim, the plaintiff examined himself as Pw.1 and he got marked Ex.A.1 to Ex.A5. The defendant in order to meet his agricultural expenses and to discharge his sundry debts borrowed a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- from the plaintiff on 14.03.2013 and executed the promissory note agreeing to repay the amount with interest @ 24% per annum and in spite of the demands made by the plaintiff, the defendant paid an amount of Rs.20,000/- towards the part-payment of the debt due under the aforesaid promissory note and when the plaintiff asked the security for the loan contracted under the aforesaid promissory note, the defendant with an intention to create equiatable mortgage had deposited his title deed in respect of the plaint schedule property and on 17.12.2016 when the plaintiff got issued registered legal notice to the defendant, called upon him to discharge the mortgage debt and the defendant having received the same and kept quite.

8. The oral and documentary evidence placed by the plaintiff established the suit claim and nothing placed on behalf of the defendant to disprove the claim of the plaintiff against the defendant. In the circumstances the plaintiff established the suit claim. Accordingly, this point is answered in favour of the plaintiff and against the defendant.

9. In the result, the suit is decreed exparte for Rs.3,55,294/- with costs and interest at 6% per annum till realization. The redemption period is six months. A preliminary mortgage decree against the plaint schedule property was accordingly be passed with costs.

Dictated to the Stenographer, transcribed by him, corrected and pronounced by

me, in the open court, this the 10th day of April, 2017.

Secretary, DLSA, FAC/Addl. Senior Civil Judge, Machilipatnam.

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

ORAL EVIDENCE

For Plaintiff: For Defendant PW1: P.Prakash None

DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE

For Plaintiff: Ex.A1 :: Promissory note executed by defendant in favour of plaintiff dt.14.03.2013. Ex.A2 :: Part-payment of Rs.20,000/- endorsement dt.07.01.2016. Ex.A3 :: Title deed stands in the name of defendant dt.08.01.2004. Ex.A4 :: Office copy of legal notice dt.17.12.2016. Ex.A5 :: Postal acknowledgement. For Defendant: ----NIL----

Secretary, DLSA, FAC/ASCJ, MTM.

OS/184/2016

K.Satya Aruna Kumari vs J.Venkata Narayana

08 Mar 2017

IN THE COURT OF ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE :MACHILIPATNAM.

Present: Sri P.R.Rajeev, Secretary, DLSA, FAC/Addl. Senior Civil Judge, Machilipatnam Wednesday, the 8th day of March, 2017

OS.No.184/2016

Between: Kolapalli Satya Aruna Kumari, W/o.Satyanarayana, Hindu, aged about 49 years, properties, R/o.Gandhi Nagar, Tarakaturu, Guduru Mandal, Krishna District, Bandar PJCJ. … Plaintiff

And

Jonnalagadda Venkata Narayana, S/o.Venkatramaiah, Hindu, aged about 46 years, working in Police Department as PC.1536, Pamarru Police Station, Pamaru, Pamarru Mandal, Krishna District, Gudivada JCJC. …Defendant

This suit coming on this day before me for final hearing in the presence of Sri.G.J.Victor, Advocate for plaintiff and the defendant having remained Ex-parte 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. The plaintiff is seeking for recovery of suit claim along with costs and interest from the defendant on the strength of promissory note dt.05.10.2013 said to have been executed by the defendant in favour of the plaintiff having borrowed a sum of

Rs.2,50,000/- for his family expenses and to discharge his sundry debts.

2. The plaint averments are as follows.

The defendant borrowed a sum of Rs.2,50,000/- from the plaintiff on 05.10.2013 and executed the promissory note agreeing to repay the amount with interest @ 24% per annum and in spite of the demands made by the plaintiff, the defendant did not choose to repay the amount due under the promissory note. Finally, on 01.05.2015 the plaintiff got issued a legal notice to the defendant and he received the said notice and kept quiet. Hence, the suit.

3. Defendant remained ex parte.

4. Plaintiff examined himself as Pw.1 and marked Exs.A.1 to A3.

5. Heard the learned counsel for the plaintiff.

6. Now the point for consideration is:

“Whether the plaintiff is entitled for the suit claim or not?”

POINT:

7. In order to substantiate the suit claim, the plaintiff examined himself as Pw.1 and he got marked Ex.A.1 dt.05.10.2013 promissory note, Ex.A2 is the office copy of the legal notice issued by the plaintiff, Ex.A3 is the return postal cover. The defendant in order to meet his family expenses he borrowed a sum of Rs.2,50,000/- on 05.10.2013 and executed Ex.A1 promissory note in favour f the plaintiff agreeing to repay the same together with interest at 24% p.a., subsequently inspite of repeated demands the defendant failed to clear the amount due under the Ex.A1 promissory note inspite repeated demands made by the plaintiff, the plaintiff got issued legal notice to the defendant on 01.05.2015 by demanding the defendant to clear the amount due under

Ex.A1 promissory note and the defendant having received the said notice as per Ex.A3 return postal cover, the defendant failed to respond.

9. In the result, the suit is decreed ex parte for a sum of Rs.4,30,000/-- with costs and subsequent interest @ 12% p.a., from the date of suit till the date of decree and thereafter @ 6% p.a., till realization on the principal sum of Rs.2,50,000/-.

Dictated to the Stenographer, transcribed by him, corrected and pronounced by

me, in the open court, this the 8th day of March, 2017.

Secretary, DLSA, FAC/Addl. Senior Civil Judge, Machilipatnam.

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

ORAL EVIDENCE

For Plaintiff: For Defendant PW1: K.Satya Aruna Kumari None

DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE

For Plaintiff: Ex.A1 : Promissory note executed by defendant in favour of plaintiff dt.05.10.2013. Ex.A2 : Office copy of legal notice dt.01.05.2015. Ex.A3 : Return Postal cover.

For Defendant: ----NIL----

Secretary, DLSA, FAC/Addl. Senior Civil Judge, Machilipatnam.

OS/340/2012

Mullapudi Mohana Kanaka Durga Vara prasad andother vs Mullapudi Venkata Naga Vara Lakshmi

10 Apr 2017

IN THE COURT OF ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE

MACHILIPATNAM.

Present:Sri.P.R.RAJEEV, Secretary, DLSA, FAC/Addl.Senior Civil Judge, Machilipatnam,

This the 10th day of April, 2017

O.S No.340/2012

Between:

1. Mullapudi Mohana Kanaka Durga Vara Prasad, S/o.Late Mullapudi Subba Rao, Hindu, aged 42 years, Business, R/o.Sundara Nagar, Durgapuram, Vijayawada, within the limits of JCJ at Vijayawada.

2. Mullapudi Ravi Kumar, S/o. Mullapudi Subba Rao, Hindu, aged about 39 years, Employee, R/o.Sundara Nagar, Durgapuram, Vijayawada, within the limits of JCJ at Vijayawada.

…Plaintiffs

and

1. Mullapudi Venkata Naga Vara Lakshmi, W/o.China Subba Rao, Hindu, aged about 58 years, Housewife, R/o.GF7, D.No.74220, Koduru Villa Residency, Krishna Nagar, Auto Nagar, Vijayawada520007, within the limits of JCJ Vijayawada.

2. Mullapudi Anil Kumar, S/o.China Subba Rao, Hindu, aged about 35 years, R/o.GF7, D.No.74220, Koduru Villa Residency, Krishna Nagar, Auto Nagar, Vijayawada520007, within the limits of JCJ Vijayawada.

3. Mullapudi Pavan Kumar, S/o.China Subba Rao, Hindu, aged about 30 years, R/o.GF7, D.No.74220, Koduru Villa Residency, Krishna Nagar, Auto Nagar, Vijayawada520007, within the limits of JCJ Vijayawada.

4. Mullapudi Anitha Rao, D/o.China Subba Rao, Hindu, aged about 33 years, R/o.GF7, D.No.74220, Koduru Villa Residency, Krishna Nagar, Auto Nagar, Vijayawada520007, within the limits of JCJ Vijayawada.

…Defendants ***

Suit filed by the plaintiffs against the defendants to pass a decree for partition of the plaint schedule property into two equal shares and to allot one such share to the plaintiffs by metes and bounds; to pass the final decree on the basis of preliminary decree in the event of the nonexecution of the document for partition by the defendants and for costs of the suit.

This suit is coming on this day for consideration in the presence of

Sri.A.Sainadha Babu, Advocate (Vijayawada) for the plaintiffs and

Sri.C.B.Y.N.Sastry, Advocate for the defendant No.1 and the defendants No.2 to

No.4 remained exparte and this court delivered the following :

JUDGMENT

Plaintiff absent no representation, costs not paid. Inspite of granting time plaintiffs not evincing interest by appearing and get along with the case, hence there is no point in granting time accordingly suit is dismissed for default without costs.

Pronounced by me in the Open Court on this the 10th day of April, 2017.

Secretary, DLSA, FAC/Addl.Senior Civil Judge, Machilipatnam.

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

NIL

Secretary, DLSA FAC/Addl.Senior Civil Judge, Machilipatnam.

Order Record 606 total

Case No.	Parties	Date	Type	Outcome
EP/148/2015	Punakollu Venkata Ramana vs Bolla Venkateswaramma	28 Apr 2017	Other	—
EP/154/2015	Tadepalli Asha Rani vs Tadepalli Leela Venugopal	24 Apr 2017	Order	—
EP/64/2016	Ganta Ravindra Prasad vs Gopaluni Purushottama Sarma	19 Apr 2017	Other	—
EP/188/2016	Chaduvula Nageswara rao vs Nadakuduti Adiseshu	19 Apr 2017	Other	—
EP/132/2016	M.NAGA VENKATA PURNACHANDRA RAO vs PUVVADA BAPIRAJU	17 Apr 2017	Other	—
OS/22/2017	Parasa Prakash vs P.V.V.Narasimha swamy	10 Apr 2017	Judgment	—
OS/340/2012	Mullapudi Mohana Kanaka Durga Vara prasad andother vs Mullapudi Venkata Naga Vara Lakshmi	10 Apr 2017	Judgment	—
EP/41/2016	K.JAGANATHA RAO vs JONNALAGADDA SUBRAHMANYAM	08 Apr 2017	Other	—
EP/116/2016	VINNAKOTA LAKSHMI vs GUNTURU SITHA	08 Apr 2017	Other	—
OS/182/2016	Chevuri Venkata Ramesh vs Inampudi Mangamma and 2 others	08 Apr 2017	Other	—
OS/184/2015	Kareti Samba Siva Rao vs Pallapothu Veera Venkateswara Babji	08 Apr 2017	Other	—
OS/204/2016	Muddineni Chitti babu vs Ande Venkata Srimannarayana	08 Apr 2017	Other	—
EP/99/2016	Jagruti chit fiund pvt limited Kaikaluru vs Shaik Abdul Raheem and 3 others	07 Apr 2017	Other	—
EP/119/2016	D.Venkata Ravamma vs GLalitha and other	03 Apr 2017	Order	—
OS/261/2007	Valavala Satyanarayana vs Penumatcha Sarojini	27 Mar 2017	Judgment	—
OS/390/2014	P.Lokanadham vs B.Venkata Koteswara rao	24 Mar 2017	Other	—
OS/184/2016	K.Satya Aruna Kumari vs J.Venkata Narayana	08 Mar 2017	Judgment	—
EP/148/2016	K.Mohan das Gandhi vs N.V.Venkatesham	27 Feb 2017	Other	—
OS/294/2009	Gudipati Sriramulu vs Gudipati Jagannadha Rao	11 Feb 2017	Other	—
OS/362/2015	YENDURI LAKSHMI KANTHA RAO vs CHEERLA VEERA BHADRA RAO @ BHADRAM	11 Feb 2017	Order	—
EP/105/2016	Kolapalli Satya Aruna Kumari vs Sudulaganti Venkateswara Rao and other	30 Jan 2017	Other	—
EP/180/2016	K.SATYA ARUNA KUMARI vs K.DAVID RAJU	24 Jan 2017	Other	—
EP/93/2016	Yenduri PoornaChandra Rao vs Adavi Nageswara Rao	20 Jan 2017	Other	—
EP/161/2016	Margadarsi chit fund pvt ltd Machilipatnam vs L.Naga babu and 3 others	06 Jan 2017	Other	—
EP/168/2016	K.Gopala Rao vs M.Mruthanjaya rao	04 Jan 2017	Other	—
EP/178/2015	Kasagani Sudhakar vs Y.Dharma Rao	04 Jan 2017	Other	—
OS/86/2016	P.RAMANJANEYULU vs U.NIRMALA AND ANOTHER	04 Jan 2017	Order On Exgibit	—
EP/40/2015	Katram Kesava Rama Rao vs Jarugu Sambaiah	02 Jan 2017	Order	—
EP/84/2016	Yerra Madhu Babu vs A.Krishna Priya	02 Jan 2017	Other	—
OS/90/2016	NALLAGATCHU BALAYOGI vs GURUDASU VENKATESWARA RAO	02 Jan 2017	Order On Exgibit	—
OS/110/2016	Y.Naga Venkata prasad vs Shaik Azis	02 Jan 2017	Other	—
OS/144/2016	N.Jagan Mohan Rao vs A.Rajesh Kumar	02 Jan 2017	Order On Exgibit	—
OS/166/2015	State Bank of India, ADB Branch vs Chaitanya Self Group and in 14 others	02 Jan 2017	Order On Exgibit	—
OS/250/2015	L.Sita Ramaiah vs R.Satyanarayana	02 Jan 2017	Order On Exgibit	—
OS/134/2016	D.Jaganmohan Rao vs Sk.Muneer Basha	30 Dec 2016	Other	—
EP/95/2016	Kapil chit funds pvt ltd Gudivada vs Palanchu Ajay Kumar and 5 others	23 Dec 2016	Order	—
EP/44/2016	STATE BANK OF INDIA vs KANAPARTHY BHUDEVI	22 Dec 2016	Other	—
EP/127/2016	L.Venkata Ramana Murthy vs P.Banerji	22 Dec 2016	Other	—
EP/4/2011	Yerriwada Venkata Subbareddy vs Kolla Venkataramana	20 Dec 2016	Other	—
OS/267/2014	STATE BANK OF INDIA vs P.Ankamma and one another	12 Dec 2016	Order	—
EP/21/2016	Garikipati Rama Devi vs Janapala Gangajalam	05 Dec 2016	Other	—
OS/82/2015	Kandula Jamuna Rani vs Kandula Venkata Mehar Babu	05 Dec 2016	Order On Exgibit	—
OS/132/2016	M.Satrughnudu vs P.Naga Babu	05 Dec 2016	Order On Exgibit	—
OS/180/2016	Dondapati Laxmipathi Rao vs Dalai Sivaram prasad and other	05 Dec 2016	Order On Exgibit	—
EP/144/2016	Ms Shriram city P ltd, Machilipatnam vs Bangaru Satya Prasad and 2 others	29 Nov 2016	Other	—
EP/47/2016	STATE BANK OF INDIA vs BODA JANARDHANA RAO AND ANOTHER	28 Nov 2016	Other	—
EP/86/2014	Sri Venkata Annapurna Rice Mill Contractors Compan vs Sri Venkatadri Raw and Boiled Rice Mill and others	17 Nov 2016	Order	—
EP/135/2016	P.Nageswara rao vs Md.Hussain	17 Nov 2016	Other	—
OS/68/2016	GUMMADI RANI vs GUMMADI PURNACHANDRA RAO AND 3 OTHERS	12 Nov 2016	Order	—
EP/33/2016	GSA SAMBASIVA RAO AND SONS REGISTERED vs MS NAVEEN SILKS OLD TAMANAS AND ANOTHER	31 Oct 2016	Other	—
EP/19/2016	Mandava Swathantra Bhkaratha Kumari vs Gollu Srinivasa Rao	25 Oct 2016	Other	—
EP/2/2016	Puvvada Sunitha vs Nutakki Rammohan Rao	24 Oct 2016	Order	—
EP/49/2011	Kedari Sundaramma vs Lingam Satyam	24 Oct 2016	Other	—
EP/115/2016	MS.SHRIRAM CHITS PVT LTD., vs KANAGALA RAJA SEKHAR AND 2 OTHERS	21 Oct 2016	Other	—
EP/167/2015	XXXXX vs XXXXX	21 Oct 2016	Order	—
SC/46/2015	AP State vs Puli Venkateswara Rao	21 Oct 2016	Other	—
EP/27/2016	T.AMRUTHA VALLI vs M.DEENA DHANA SAROJINI	20 Oct 2016	Other	—
OS/93/2010	Boyidi Venkateswararao vs Battula Satyanarayana	19 Oct 2016	Other	—
OS/243/2012	Adapala Bapana Rao vs Adapal Vijayalakshmi and others	19 Oct 2016	Judgment	—
EP/39/2011	Nagineni Rajendraprasad vs Md.Yusuff	18 Oct 2016	Other	—
OS/10/2016	E.Satyanarayana vs E.Satyavathi and 2 others	17 Oct 2016	Other	—
EP/12/2016	Amireddy Venkata Srinivasa Rao vs Gudavalli Pushpalu	14 Oct 2016	Other	—
EP/65/2016	Vinnakota Gurunadha Babu vs Natta Kutumba Rao	14 Oct 2016	Other	—
EP/120/2015	State Bank of India, Main branch, rep by chief man vs Vschennu Venkata ramana	14 Oct 2016	Order	—
EP/121/2015	State Bank of India, Main branch, machilipatnam vs Muttevi Seshu babu	14 Oct 2016	Order	—
EP/124/2015	State Bank of India, Machilipatnam vs Thota Venkata Soma Sekhar and other	14 Oct 2016	Other	—
EP/144/2015	Naragam Param Jyothi vs Gurram Ram Babu	14 Oct 2016	Other	—
EP/177/2015	J.Venkata Satyanarayana vs V.Sri Rama Chandra Rao	14 Oct 2016	Other	—
EP/13/2015	P.Kanaka Chintanna vs Md. Ameer	13 Oct 2016	Order	—
EP/54/2011	Kapil Chit Funds Pvt. Ltd., vs Gutla John Subbarao	13 Oct 2016	Other	—
EP/77/2016	Gurram Veera Narasimha Rao vs Pallantla Surya Nagendra Rao and other	29 Sep 2016	Other	—
OS/39/2008	kSri Nataraj Picture Palace, vs Jasti Venkateswsara Rao	29 Sep 2016	Order On Exgibit	—
OS/208/2015	Jogi Chandra Raju Kumar vs Nil	29 Sep 2016	Other	—
SC/130/2015	AP State, SHO, Bantumilli PS vs Vemuri Naga Raju	29 Sep 2016	Other	—
EP/120/2016	K.Satya Aruna Kumari vs K,David Raju	28 Sep 2016	Order	—
EP/171/2015	Ulli Veera Venkateswara Rao vs Pattapu Naga Srinivasa Rao	28 Sep 2016	Other	—
SC/133/2016	SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE vs JALDU PAIDEIAH	28 Sep 2016	Judgment	—
EP/69/2016	State Bank of India vs G.Satya Prakash	26 Sep 2016	Other	—
EP/70/2016	State Bank of India MTM vs G.Gopal Swaroop	26 Sep 2016	Other	—
EP/101/2016	Bommisetty Seshagiri Rao vs Ganta Niranjana Rao	26 Sep 2016	Order	—
OS/243/2004	Mohammed Rasool Baig vs Mohammed Rahamtullah baig and 4 others	26 Sep 2016	Judgment	—
EP/113/2015	XXXXX vs XXXXX	23 Sep 2016	Order On Exgibit	—
EP/113/2015	XXXXX vs XXXXX	23 Sep 2016	Order	—
EP/177/2015	J.Venkata Satyanarayana vs V.Sri Rama Chandra Rao	23 Sep 2016	Order	—
EP/177/2015	J.Venkata Satyanarayana vs V.Sri Rama Chandra Rao	23 Sep 2016	Order On Exgibit	—
SC/1/2016	SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE vs Puppala Srirama Murthy and 3 others	22 Sep 2016	Other	—
EP/16/2016	Yerramsetti Indira Devi vs Dhanala Thota babu	20 Sep 2016	Other	—
OS/25/2011	Balusu Babjee Rao @ Nageswara Rao vs Balusu venkata Narayana	19 Sep 2016	Other	—
EP/161/2015	M.Kotavenkata Subbarao vs SUREPALLI SRINIVASARAO	16 Sep 2016	Other	—
OS/268/2013	S.Brahmaswara Rao vs P.Kusuma and 2 others	16 Sep 2016	Order On Exgibit	—
EP/29/2014	Md.Liyakath Ali vs Naidu Krishna Rao	15 Sep 2016	Order	—
EP/11/2016	Arava Ravi Kiran vs Pattapu Naga Srinivasa Rao	14 Sep 2016	Other	—
EP/118/2016	XXXXX vs XXXXX	14 Sep 2016	Order	—
EP/20/2011	Margadarsi Chit Fund Pvt Ltd., vs Velivela Jansilakshmi	13 Sep 2016	Other	—
OS/363/2010	Vundi Naresh Babu vs Jonnalagadda subrahmanyam	08 Sep 2016	Order On Exgibit	—
OS/147/2009	Mamidibattula Shankar vs Kokkiligadda Krishna Murthy	07 Sep 2016	Order On Exgibit	—
EP/30/2016	K.SATYA ARUNA KUMARI vs GADDE RAJABABU	06 Sep 2016	Other	—
OS/2/2016	K.Siva Krishna vs N.Rajasekhar	02 Sep 2016	Order On Exgibit	—
OS/284/2013	J.Mallikharjuna Rao vs E.B.S.Kumar	02 Sep 2016	Order On Exgibit	—
OS/290/2015	Syndicate Bank, Machilipatnam vs Sonia Sultana Md.	02 Sep 2016	Order On Exgibit	—

Showing 100 of 606 orders — Log in to browse all pages.

Monthly Orders (Last 12 Months)

Apr 2017		14
Mar 2017		3
Feb 2017		3
Jan 2017		14
Dec 2016		10
Nov 2016		6
Oct 2016		21
Sep 2016		30
Aug 2016		30
Jul 2016		12
Jun 2016		13
May 2016		1

Frequently Asked Questions

How many cases has Sri P.R.Rajeev handled?

Sri P.R.Rajeev has handled 623 court orders since 2015 at Prl District Courts, Machilipatnam. The average disposal rate is 27 orders per month.

What types of cases does Sri P.R.Rajeev hear?

Based on available records, Sri P.R.Rajeev primarily handles Civil matters (Execution Petitions, Original Suits) and Criminal matters (Sessions Cases) at Prl District Courts, Machilipatnam.

Where is Sri P.R.Rajeev currently posted?

Sri P.R.Rajeev is posted as Addl. Senior Civil Judge, Machilipatnam at Prl District Courts, Machilipatnam, Krishna, Andhra Pradesh.

Are judgments by Sri P.R.Rajeev available online?

Yes. 10 judgments by Sri P.R.Rajeev are available on Legistro with full text, outcome, and sections cited.

How fast does Sri P.R.Rajeev dispose cases?

Sri P.R.Rajeev disposes approximately 27 cases per month, based on 623 orders handled over their tenure at Prl District Courts, Machilipatnam.

Since when is Sri P.R.Rajeev serving?

Sri P.R.Rajeev has been serving at Prl District Courts, Machilipatnam since 2015.

Case Types

EP 49%

OS 47%

SC 3%

H 1%

IP 0%

Posting History

Apr 2016 — May 2017

Addl. Senior Civil Judge, Machilipatnam · 176 orders
Feb 2016 — Jun 2016

FAC. Senior Civil Judge, Avanigadda · 14 orders
May 2015 — Mar 2016

Addl. Senior Civil Judge, Machilipatnam · 433 orders

Outcomes on Record

Convicted 1

Other Judges at this Court

Sri Guttala Gopi

Principal District Judge , Machilipatnam

448 orders

Smt Kondabolu Sunitha

I Addl. District Judge, Machilipatnam

0 orders

Sri P Panduranga Reddy

VI Addl. District Judge, Machilipatnam

20 orders

Sri T.Raja Venkatadri

IX Addl.District Judge, Machilipatnam

2 orders

Sri G.Venkateswarlu

X Addl.District Judge Machilipatnam

0 orders

Smt. K.V.L.Himabindu

Prl. Senior Civil Judge, Machilipatnam

310 orders

Sri Ch Yugandhar

Addl. Senior Civil Judge, Machilipatnam

306 orders

Smt. Jonnapalli Bala Tripura Sundari Devi

Judl.Magistrate of Ist Class,Spl.Mobile Court,MTM

198 orders

Sri Mohammed Rahamtulla

Principal Junior Civil Judge, Machilipatnam

0 orders

Smt P. Sai Sudha

Ist Addl. Junior Civil Judge, Machilipatnam

0 orders

← View all judges at Prl District Courts, Machilipatnam