Sri. Rama Chandra Rao Nadendla

IN THE COURT OF THE XXI JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE, CITY CIVIL COURT

HYDERABAD.

PRESENT: SRI N. RAMA CHANDRA RAO,

XIX JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE,

FAC XXI JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE,

CITY CIVIL COURT, HYDERABAD

MONDAY, DATED THIS THE 30th DAY OF MARCH, 2026

ORIGINAL SUIT NO. 3093 OF 2025

Between: Mr. Gudiseva Saibabu, S/o G V Subbaiah, Aged about 69 yrs, Occ: Business, R/o H No. Flat No. TF-2, 3rd Floor, tonia Towers Patamata, Opp Nirmala Convent Vijayawada (Urban) Krishna Dist, Andhra Pradesh-520010, Aadhar No: 6063 6707 3713 … PLAINTIFFS

A N D

1.Mr. Modha Venkata Subbaiah @ Subbu, S/o Not Known Aged about Major yrs, Occ: Bussiness

2.Smt Modha Sirisha, W/o Bodha Venkata Subbaiah Aged about Not known yrs, Occ: Housewife

Both are R/o Flat No.201, Tulasi Apartment, H-17, Madhura Nagar, Hyderabad-500038 … DEFENDANTS

This suit is coming before me on 18-02-2026 in the presence of Sri N.

Murali Krishna learned Counsel for the plaintiffs and defendants were Set exparte and the matter having stood over for consideration to this day, this court delivered the following.

J U D G M E N T

1.This suit is filed by plaintiff for grant of decree directing the defendant to vacate the suit schedule property, to direct the defendant to pay

O.S. NO. 3093 OF 2024 Page 2 OF 15

the arrears of monthly rents amounting to Rs. 1,86,000/- till June 2023 and

Award the damages for unauthorized use and occupation including structural and sanitary damage caused to the suit schedule property quantified at Rs.

6,00,000/- and to grant permanent Injunction restraining the defendants, their agents, sevants or family persons etc.

2. The averments mentioned the plaint are as follows :-

It is submitted that the Plaintiff is the absolute owner and peaceful possessor of Flat No.201, admeasuring 663 Sq.ft., in Sy No. 34,35,36 situated at Tulasi Apartment, H-17, Madhura Nagar, Hyderabad-500038 and bounded by North: Open to Sky, South: Open to Sky, East Open to Sky, and West Flat

No. 202 (hereinafter referred to as Suit Schedule Property). The Plaintiff is the owner and landlord of the said premises and the Defendants are the Tenant of the Suit Schedule Property. The Plaintiff further submits that the Defendants joined as Tenants in the above suit schedule property in the year 2011. The

Defendants have been consistently irregular in paying the flat rent to the

Plaintiff. Despite several requests and reminders, they are not paying the rent on time. Moreover, the Defendants' children have caused substantial damage to the Plaintiff's flat.

The Plaintiff submits that despite several attempts by the Plaintiff to communicate amicably and considering the well-being of all concerned, the

Plaintiff has received complaints from other flat owners stating that the

Defendants are behaving indecently. When the Plaintiff politely requested the

XXI JCJ, CCC, HYD

O.S. NO. 3093 OF 2024 Page 3 OF 15

Defendants to vacate the flat, one of the Defendants threatened those who came to convey the request, behaving like a rowdy-sheeter and creating fear, thereby preventing them from vacating the premises.

Since the year 2017, the Defendants have been keeping around 20 dogs in the Plaintiff's Flat No. 201 and have been running a cross-breeding business from the said premises. Due to this, the entire flat has been severely damaged.

As a result, the other flat owners are facing serious inconvenience and have been continuously approaching the Plaintiff with complaints, requesting the

Plaintiff to take necessary steps to vacate the Defendants from the said flat. It is submitted that the defendants are irregular in payment of monthly rents and failed to pay the rents amounting to Rs. 1,86,000/- upto June, 2023,. The defendants has misused the suit schedule property by doing commercial business of dogs cross breeding, whereby causing considerable damage to the suit schedule property and a sum of Rs.6,00,000/- is to be paid by the defendants to the plaintiff towards the damages caused to the suit schedule property.

The Plaintiff submits that the Plaintiff has sent below Whatsapp messages to the Defendant No.1

I.In June 2022, the Plaintiff sent a WhatsApp message to Defendant

No. 1, informing him that rent arrears amounting to 1,50,000/- were₹ outstanding and demanding immediate payment. Although Defendant No.

1 read the message, he neither replied noг remitted the dues. The Plaintiff

XXI JCJ, CCC, HYD

O.S. NO. 3093 OF 2024 Page 4 OF 15

also made daily telephone calls, but the Defendant remained unresponsive.

II.In March 2023, Defendant No. 1 asked the Plaintiff and suggested that the Plaintiff sell the flat. In response, the Plaintiff sent a WhatsApp message stating, "Please pay the rent today. I am not selling the flat." The

Defendant again failed to respond.

III.In 03 April 2023 - the Plaintiff send repeated Demand and Express

Notice.

At 11:09 a.m - The Plaintiff reiterated his demand for payment of rent via

WhatsApp. At 1:03 p.m. - The Plaintiff sent a further message: "I am coming to Hyderabad this week. You are always lying and are still not paying the rental dues of 1,86,000/- up to March 2023. Without my₹

Knowledge, you are conducting a dog-breeding business in the flat."

To date, the Defendant has neither cleared the outstanding rent nor provided any explanation, thereby compounding the arrears and aggravating the Plaintiff's losses.

IV.On 13.04.2023, the Plaintiff sent a WhatsApp message to

Defendant No.1 stating: "Please vacate my house by 30th of this month."

This was a clear and unequivocal direction to vacate the premises within a reasonable time, owing to continued default in rent payment and unauthorized activities.

XXI JCJ, CCC, HYD

O.S. NO. 3093 OF 2024 Page 5 OF 15

V.Subsequently, on 02.10.2023, the Plaintiff once again messaged

Defendant No.1 via WhatsApp as follows: "Please pay rent of 15,000/-₹ from this month, otherwise vacate my flat by 1st November." Despite repeated written and verbal demands, the Defendant continued to neglect rent obligations and failed to vacate the flat, thereby willfully occupying the premises without legal right or consent.

VI.11.11.2023, and 05.12.2023-repeated Vacate Notices

On each of the above dates, the Plaintiff sent further WhatsApp messages to Defendant No. 1, once again directing the Defendants to vacate Flat

No. 201 immediately. Despite receiving and reading all three messages, the Defendants neither replied nor complied.

VII.31.12.2023 Detailed Final Warning and Claim for Damages On 31

December 2023, the Plaintiff issued a comprehensive WhatsApp message to Defendant No. 1 in the following terms (emphasis added): "Subbu, you have not paid rent for October 2023 and have still not cleared it to date.

You have caused extensive damage to my flat, amounting to approximately 6,00,000/-. You have never paid the agreed monthly rent₹ on time; you paid 15,000/- only occasionally and entirely on your own₹ terms, disregarding mine. Further, without my knowledge, since 2018 you have been conducting a dog cross-breeding business in my flat, earning

XXI JCJ, CCC, HYD

O.S. NO. 3093 OF 2024 Page 6 OF 15

lakhs of rupees, which has disturbed the other flat owners, tenants, and neighbours.

3.The Plaintiff submits that the Plaintiff's daughter secured employment with

L&T and, as a result, needs to reside in the Plaintiff's flat. Accordingly, when the Plaintiff and his family visited Flat No. 201 to request the Defendants to vacate the premises, they were shocked to find a foul and unbearable stench throughout the flat due to the cross-breeding of dogs being conducted inside.

The Plaintiff submits that the Plaintiff and his family members have repeatedly contacted Defendant No. 1 through numerous phone calls and messages, requesting them to vacate the flat. In response, Defendant No. 1 assured that they would vacate the premises by 30.06.2024. However, to date, they have neither vacated the flat nor paid any rent for several months. It is pertinent to note that the Defendants entered into possession of the Plaintiff's flat without executing any rental agreement and have continued their unlawful occupation.

As per the terms agreed upon with the Plaintiff, the Defendant was obligated to pay rent, but he failed to do so and instead behaved in a rowdy and intimidating manner, stating that he would not pay the rent.

4.The Plaintiff submits that on 03.09.2024, when the Plaintiff dialed 100, the

Madhura Nagar patrolling police arrived at the Plaintiff's Flat No. 201. At that time, Defendant No.1 absconded from the premises. However, on the same day, Defendant No.2 paid an outstanding rent amount of Rs. 60,000/-, which

XXI JCJ, CCC, HYD

O.S. NO. 3093 OF 2024 Page 7 OF 15

covered four months' rent. Since that day, despite several attempts by the police to contact Defendant No.1 and summon him to Madhura Nagar Police

Station, he has been deliberately evading and failing to appear.

5.It is submitted that despite repeated notices, the Defendants continue to occupy Flat No. 201 without vacating it. They are still conducting an unlawful dog cross-breeding business from the premises, thereby alarming and distressing the other flat owners. The Defendants have failed to pay the monthly rent regularly and have behaved in a rowdy, intimidating manner toward the Plaintiff while wrongfully retaining possession of the flat.

Photographs and video recordings clearly showing the illegal dog-breeding activities inside the Plaintiff's flat have been collected and are being filed.

6.The Plaintiff respectfully submits that over the past six months, the conduct of the Defendant has undergone a sudden and drastic change. The

Defendant has begun exerting undue pressure on the Plaintiff and is unlawfully attempting to prevent the Plaintiff from exercising his rightful ownership and possession over the suit schedule property.

7.The Plaintiff submits that the Plaintiff visited the said property on 10.06.2025, 12.06.2025, 27.06.2025, 05.07.2025, and 13.07.2025, and on several other occasions. Notably, on 05.07.2025 and 13.07.2025 at around 10:30 A.M., when the Plaintiff arrived at the premises, he found the property

XXI JCJ, CCC, HYD

O.S. NO. 3093 OF 2024 Page 8 OF 15

locked from inside, and the Defendants were deliberately absconding from the flat to avoid confrontation. The Plaintiff submits that on the following day, when the Plaintiff approached the Defendant, the Defendant began abusing the

Plaintiff, his family members, and even other flat owners in vulgar, abusive, and un-parliamentary language. The Defendant issued serious threats and warned the Plaintiff not to interfere or attempt to vacate him from the premises, stating, in threatening tone: "If you come again asking me to vacate, I will see your end." It is submitted that the Defendant has illegally taken possession of the

Plaintiff's suit schedule property and continues to trespass upon it. He has further issued threats of dire consequences, boasting of his influence in political circles and with local police authorities. His intimidation is intended to instill fear in the Plaintiff and to unlawfully retain possession of the Plaintiff's property.

8.The Plaintiff submits that assessed on the facts narrated in the plaint, the following offences are done by the Defendants i. Mischief Causing Damage to the Plaintiff's flat (structural, hygienic, and otherwise) due to unauthorized dog breeding activity ii. Criminal Trespass the Defendants' continued occupation of the flat after repeated notices and threats to the Plaintiff amounts to criminal trespass.

iii. Criminal Intimidation the Defendant's use of threats like "I will see your end" and abuse toward Plaintiff and flat members amount to criminal intimidation.

XXI JCJ, CCC, HYD

O.S. NO. 3093 OF 2024 Page 9 OF 15

iv. Public Nuisance keeping 20 dogs and running an unlicensed breeding business in a residential flat causing unbearable stench and disturbance to other residents constitutes public nuisance.

v. Cheating (if deception about purpose of tenancy or misuse of residential property is proven) Misrepresentation and misuse of the premises for illegal commercial gain could amount to cheating.

9.It is submitted that the Plaintiff then approached the concerned police station (P.S. Madhuranagar) to lodge a complaint but the police officials refused to accept the same on the pretext that it is a civil dispute and stated that they have no authority to interfere in civil disputes. The Plaintiff originally let the suit schedule property to the Defendant purely for residential purposes.

However, without the Plaintiff's knowledge or consent, the Defendant not only defaulted in paying the agreed monthly rent but also converted the premises into an illicit dog cross-breeding enterprise, amassing unlawful profits running into lakhs of rupees By persistently withholding rent and refusing to vacate despite repeated demands, the Defendant has subjected the Plaintiff to

Continuous financial loss and severe mental agony. Having no other efficacious remedy, the Plaintiff is constrained to invoke the jurisdiction of this Hon'ble

Court and seeks appropriate reliefs in accordance with law. Hence this suit.

10.Despite Service of summons, Defendants chose not to appear and contest the case. As a result, Defendants No. 1 and 2 were Set Exparte.

XXI JCJ, CCC, HYD

O.S. NO. 3093 OF 2024 Page 10 OF 15

11.Now, the point for determination is :

“Whether the plaintiff is entitled for eviction of defendant s

from suit schedule property and recovery of arrears of rent from

the defendant as prayed for ?”

12.Heard counsel for plaintiff. Perused material on record and written arguments filed by the plaintiff.

ANSWER TO POINT :

13.During trial, the G.P.A for Plaintiff examined as PW.1 and got exhibited documents A.1 to A.7 in support of her claim. As defendant did not turn up to the court, matter proceeded exparte. In her affidavit, PW1 reiterated the averments as mentioned in plaint. Ex.A1 is the Certified Copy of Sale Deed,

Ex.A2 is the Certified Copy of Encumbrance Certificate, dated 30-06-2025.

Exs. A1 and A2 shows the plaintiff as the absolute owner of the said premises.

Ex.A3 is the Photographs and Videos (Pendrive), Ex.A4 is the Original Aadhar

Card of Plaintiff. Ex.A5 is the Whatsapp Conversation printout of 5 pages (as per Sec. 65B of the Indian Evidence Act).

14.As per Section 111 (g) of Transfer of Property Act, 1882 a lease of immovable property determines ‘on the expiration of a notice to determine the lease, or to quit, or of intention to quit, the property leased, duly given by one party to the other’. As per Section 111 (h) of Transfer of Property Act, ‘by forfeiture; that is to say, (1) in case the lessee breaks an express condition which provides that, on breach thereof, the lessor may re-enter;. By exhibits A3,

XXI JCJ, CCC, HYD

O.S. NO. 3093 OF 2024 Page 11 OF 15

A4 and A6, Plaintiffs have proved valid termination and continued unauthorised occupation of defendant.

As per Section 108(l) of Transfer of Property Act, 1882 ‘the lessee is bound to pay or tender, at the proper time and place, the premium or rent to the lessor or his agent in this behalf.’

As per Section 108(q) of Transfer of Property Act, 1882 ‘on the determination of the lease, the lessee is bound to put the lessor into possession of the property.’

As per Section 108(o) of Transfer of Property Act, 1882 ‘the lessee may use the property and its products (if any) as a person of ordinary prudence would use them if they were his own; but he must not use, or permit another to use, the property for a purpose other than that for which it was leased, or fell or sell timber, pull down or damage buildings belonging to the lessor, or work mines or quarries not open when the lease was granted, or commit any other act which is destructive or permanently injurious thereto;’

15.A combined perusal of all these documents goes to show that defendant who is tenant of plaint schedule property, had made default in payment of rents, using the premises other than for the purpose of intended use, and also failed to vacate and handover the possession of suit schedule propertyto plaintiff.

16.The Plaintiff's ownership of the Suit Schedule Property is established beyond doubt through Ex. A1 (Sale Deed) and corroborated by Ex. A2

XXI JCJ, CCC, HYD

O.S. NO. 3093 OF 2024 Page 12 OF 15

(Encumbrance Certificate). The landlord-tenant relationship is admitted in the pleadings. In a month-to-month tenancy, the tenancy can be terminated by issuing a 15-day notice under Section 106 of the Transfer of Property Act. The

WhatsApp communications marked as Ex. A5, specifically the messages dated 03.04.2023 and 02.10.2023 asking the Defendants to vacate, serve as valid statutory notice in the modern electronic era. The Defendants, being ex-parte, have not rebutted this evidence. Therefore, the Plaintiff is legally entitled to the recovery of vacant possession.

17.The Plaintiff's sworn testimony (PW-1) regarding the unpaid rent of Rs.

1,86,000/- up to June 2023, minus the Rs. 60,000/- paid on 03.09.2024, stands unchallenged. The demands made via Ex. A5 further substantiate the default.

Such admission of the jural relationship enables decree for possession upon valid termination as was held in the case of “Payal Vision Ltd. v. Radhika

Choudhary”, (2012) 11 SCC 405. Moreover, Adverse inference Sec. 114 I.E.Act can be drawn for non appearance of defendants despite due service of suit summons.

18.The Plaintiff has alleged that the Defendants are running a commercial dog cross-breeding business in a residential flat, causing severe nuisance and damage. This is substantiated by visual evidence in Ex. A3 (Photographs and

Videos). Operating a commercial animal breeding business in a residential

XXI JCJ, CCC, HYD

O.S. NO. 3093 OF 2024 Page 13 OF 15

apartment without the landlord's consent is a clear violation of the terms of tenancy and municipal laws in view of Sec. 108(o) of T.P. Act.

19.For the claim of Rs. 6,00,000/- towards damages. No documentary proof is filed to prove the value of damages caused to the suit schedule property of the plaintiff by the defendant. Except for mere averments in the plaint there is no documentary evidence on record to establish the claim of the plaintiff. Therefore, in view of the above discussion, this Court is of the opinion that the plaintiff herein had failed to prove his claim of amount of Rs. 6,00,000/- towards damages caused by the defendant to suit schedule property in the present case.

Hence, Issue No.4 is answered against the plaintiff.

20.The evidence adduced by the Plaintiff remains unchallenged, un- cross-examined, and un-rebutted by the Defendants. The Court has no reason to disbelieve the sworn testimony of the Plaintiff and the documentary evidence on record. The Plaintiff has successfully proved his case.

21.In the Result, the suit of the Plaintiff is PARTLY DECREED with costs, against Defendants 1 and 2, on the following terms:

i)The Defendants 1 and 2 are hereby directed to vacate and hand over the peaceful and vacant possession of the Suit Schedule Property to the

Plaintiff within Sixty (60) days from the date of this Judgment and further the defendants ar restrained from carrying-on any unlawful activities in suit schedule property.

XXI JCJ, CCC, HYD

O.S. NO. 3093 OF 2024 Page 14 OF 15

ii)The Defendants are jointly and severally liable to pay the arrears of unpaid rent of Rs. 1,86,000/- up to June 2023, within (60) days from the date of this Judgment. and if any amount already paid is liable to be set off.

Typed to my diction to the Stenographer, corrected and pronounced by me in the open court on this the 30 th March, 2026.

XIX JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE,

FAC XXI JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE,

CITY CIVIL COURT, HYDERABAD.

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

WITNESS EXAMINED

PLAINTIFF DEFENDANT

PW1- Nil - Gudiseva Saibabu

DOCUMENTS MARKED

PLAINTIFFS

Ex. A1Certified Copy of Sale Deed

Ex. A2Certified Copy of Encumbrance Certificate, dated 30-06-2025.

Ex. A3Photographs and Videos (Pendrive)

Ex. A4Original Aadhar Card of Plaintiff

Ex. A5Whatsapp Conversation printout of 5 pages (as per Sec. 64B of the Indian Evidence Act).

XXI JCJ, CCC, HYD

O.S. NO. 3093 OF 2024 Page 15 OF 15

DOCUMENTS MARKED

DEFENDANTS

- Nil -

XIX JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE,

FAC XXI JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE,

CITY CIVIL COURT, HYDERABAD.

XXI JCJ, CCC, HYD

IN THE COURT OF THE XXII JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE,

CITY CIVIL COURT, HYDERABAD

TUESDAY, DATED THIS THE 04th DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2025

PRESENT : Sri N. RAMACHANDRA RAO

XIX JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE

FAC: XXII JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE

CITY CIVIL COURT, HYDERABAD

OS. No. 4157 of 2024

Between :

1. Syed Shah Mohd Al Faiyaz, S/o. Syed Shah Mohd Al Ghazi, Aged about 40 years, Occ: Business, R/o. 9-3-58/AK/134, Afsar Colony, Golconda, Hyderabad – 500008.

2. Syed Ahmed Ali Khan, Syed Shah Mohd Al Ghazi, Aged about 39 years, Occ: Business, R/o. 9-3-58/AK/134, Afsar Colony, Golconda, Hyderabad – 500008.

3. Syed Qader Ali Khan, S/o. Syed Shah Mohd. Al Ghazi, Aged about 39 years, Occ: Business, R/o. 9-3-58/AK/134, Afsar Colony, Golconda, Hyderabad – 500008.

4. Syed Rafe Ali Khan, S/o. Syed Shah Mohd Al Ghazi, Aged about 27 years, Occ: Business, R/o. 9-3-58/AK/134, Afsar Colony, Golconda, Hyderabad – 500008.

Cont’d...

Page No. 2 O. S. No. 4157 of 2024

5. Syeda Mohammadi Firdous, D/o. Syed Shah Mohd. Al Ghazi, W/o. Malik Mohammed Ali Khan, Aged about 39 years, Occ: House Hold, R/o. H. No. 19-5-28/1/1/K, Kishan Bagh, Bahadurpura, Hyderabad.

6. Syeda Habeeba Firdous, D/o. Syed Shah Mohd. Al Ghazi, R/o. H. No. 22-2-560, Daurshifa, Hyderabad.

7. Syeda Afshan Firdous, W/o. Iftekharuddin Ahmed, D/o. Syed Naseeruddin Hussain, Aged about 54 years, Occ: House hold, R/o. 22-2-560, Darushifa, Hyderabad.

8. Syeda Juveria Firdous, W/o. Late Syed Abdul Khader, D/o. Syed Naseeruddin Hussain, Aged about 52 years, Occ: Household, R/o. 10-4-28/A/1, Humayun Nagar, Masab Tank, Hyderabad.

9. Syed Habeeb Uddin Hussaini, S/o. Syed Naseeruddin Hussaini, Aged about 53 years, R/o. 10-4-28/A/1, Humayun Nagar, Masab Tank, Hyderabad.

10. Syeda Kanees Fatima, D/o. Syed Naseeruddin Hussain, W/o. Mohammed Farooq Ali, R/o. 16-8-42/A, Kaladera Malakpet, Hyderabad.

11. Syeda Safoora Firdous, D/o. Syed Naseeruddin Hussaini, W/o. Syed Aneer Mujahad Taha Afreedi Baharani, Aged about 48 years, Occ: Household, R/o. 9-2-410/C/19, Afsar Colony, Golconda, Hyderabad – 500008. Cont’d….

Page No. 3 O. S. No. 4157 of 2024

12. Syeda Hajira Firdous, D/o. Syed Naseeruddin Hussain, R/o. 9-2-410/C/19, Afsar Colony, Golconda, Hyderabad – 500008.

13. Syed Ifteqhar Ali Khan, S/o. Late Syed Khader Ali Khan, Aged about 65 years, Occ: Business, Occ: Household, R/o. 12-2-790/117, Ayodhiya Nagar Colony, Mehdipatnam, Hyderabad.

14. Syeda Vaseem Firdous, D/o. Syed Khuda Arika, W/o. Gulam Mohammed Yousuf, Aged about 69 years, Occ: House Hold, R/o. 12-2-790/117, Ayodhiya Nagar Colony, Mehdipatnam, Hyderabad.…. Plaintiffs

AND

1. All Concerned

2. The MRO, Golconda Mandal, Hyderabad. ….Defendants

This suit is coming before me for final hearing in the presence of Sri P. Venkateshwarlu, Advocate for the Plaintiffs, and Defendants Nos.1 and 2 were set 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.This isasuitfordeclarationfiledby the plaintiffs to declare them as the legal heirs of Late Abdul Haq Khan.

Cont’d….

Page No. 4 O. S. No. 4157 of 2024

The brief averments of the plaint are as follows:

2.Plaintiffs submit that, Mr. Late Syed Jah Mhammed Khan II was the Nawab of Hyderabad who passed away and buried at Dargah

Dewan Shah Baba Bhiwandi, Maharshtra and his wife Late Saidani

Maa Saheba died in the year 1875 at Secunderabad leaving behind their son as their legal heir namely Late Syed Abdul Haq Khan who died in the year 30.04.1896 at London leaving behind his only son

Late Syed Sardar Ali Khan as his legal heir who is passed away on 01.11.1942 and buried at Maqbara Abdul Haq, Secunderabad known as Sardar Nawaz Jung Bahadur and Sardar Jung Bahadur who was having a son by Name Late Syed Khader Ali Khan who died in the year 05.01.1966 leaving behind two sons and two daughters vize., 1.

Late Syed Shah Mohd. Al Ghazi, 2. Syed Iftequar Ali Khan, 3. Syeda

Waseem Firdous and 4. Late Syeda Maher Firdous.

3.Plaintiffs further submit that Late Syed Shah Mohd Al Ghzai who died on 23.01.2014 leaving behind the plaintiffs No. 1 to 7 as his legal heirs and Syed Iftequar Ali Khan, Syeda Waseem Firdous and

Late Syeda Maher Firdous died on 26.10.2021 leaving behind the plaintiffs No. 8 to 13 and Plaintiffs No. 14 and 5 are alive.

4.Plaintiffs further submit that, Mr. Abdul Haq (Sardar Dilwar

Jung Bahadur died leaving behind 7 daughter and 4 sons viz., 1.

Page No. 5 O. S. No. 4157 of 2024

Mallik Waha Begum, 2. Khadirunnisa Begum, 3. Iqbalunnisa

Begum, 4. Tamizunnisa Begum, 5. Nizamunnisa Begum, 6.

Ameerunissa Begum and 7. Aziz Unnis Begum are daughters and 1.

Syed Sharfarz Ali Khan, 2. Syed Sardar Ali Khan, 3. Syed Sultan Ali

Khan and 4. Syed Mehaboob Ali Khan are sons. Plaintiffs are being the legal heirs are unable to mutate their names in the Encumbrance

Certificate or in the Revenue / Municipal records for want of heirship as the some of the plaintiffs who are aged and illiterate could not procure the legal heir certificate after the death of their successors.

The MRO of Asifnagar, Hyderabad has issued a family member certificate showing the names of 1. Smt. Syeda Meher Firdous, 2.

Smt. Syeda Waseem Firdous, 3. Syed Shah Mohd. Ali Ghazi and 4.

Syed Iftequar Ali Khan which is not considered by the authorities and advised the plaintiffs to go and approach a civil court to get a legal heir certificate. Accordingly the plaintiffs approached the 2nd defendant and submitted the application to issue a legal heir certificate, but the 2nd defendant never acted upon the application filed by the plaintiffs. Hence, the plaintiffs have no other option except to approach this Hon’ble Court to seek a relief of declaration that the plaintiffs are the legal heirs of the deceased Late Abdul Haq

Khan. Hence the suit.

Page No. 6 O. S. No. 4157 of 2024

5.After registering the suit, summons were issued to the defendants. Summons served to defendant No.2. The Defendant No.2 was called absent and as there was no representation, the defendant No.2 was set ex-parte. The Defendant No.1 is shown as “All Concerned”. A paper publication was made inviting objections if any, in the matter from the public, but no objections were received. Hence defendant No.1 was set ex-parte.

6.During the course of trial, Smt. Syed Habeeba Firdous (Plaintiff No. 6) examined herself as PW1 and got marked Exs. A1 to

A21 documents.

7.Heard the Counsel for plaintiffs and perused the record.

“Now the point for determination is whether the plaintiffs are entitled to be declared as the legal heirs of

Late Abdul Haq Khan?”

POINT : Sri Late Syed Abdul Haq Khan who died in the year 30.04.1896 at London leaving behind his only son Late Syed Sardar

Ali Khan as his legal heir who is passed away on 01.11.1942 known as Sardar Nawaz Jung Bahadur and Sardar Jung Bahadur who was

Page No. 7 O. S. No. 4157 of 2024

having a son by Name Late Syed Khader Ali Khan who died in the year 05.01.1966 leaving behind two sons and two daughters vize., 1.

Late Syed Shah Mohd. Al Ghazi, 2. Syed Iftequar Ali Khan, 3. Syeda

Waseem Firdous and 4. Late Syeda Maher Firdous.

8.Plaintiffs further submit that Late Syed Shah Mohd Al Ghazi who died on 23.01.2014 leaving behind the plaintiffs No. 1 to 7 as his legal heirs and Syed Iftequar Ali Khan, Syeda Waseem Firdous and

Late Syeda Maher Firdous died on 26.10.2021 leaving behind the plaintiffs No. 8 to 13 and Plaintiffs No. 14 and 5 are alive. Plaintiffs further submit that, Mr. Abdul Haq (Sardar Dilwar Jung Bahadur died leaving behind 7 daughter and 4 sons viz., 1. Mallik Waha

Begum, 2. Khadirunnisa Begum, 3. Iqbalunnisa Begum, 4.

Tamizunnisa Begum, 5. Nizamunnisa Begum, 6. Ameerunissa

Begum and 7. Aziz Unnis Begum are daughters and 1. Syed Sharfarz

Ali Khan, 2. Syed Sardar Ali Khan, 3. Syed Sultan Ali Khan and 4.

Syed Mehaboob Ali Khan are sons. Plaintiffs are being the legal heirs are unable to mutate their names in the Encumbrance Certificate or in the Revenue / Municipal records for want of heirship as the some of the plaintiffs who are aged and illiterate could not procure the legal heir certificate after the death of their successors. The MRO of

Page No. 8 O. S. No. 4157 of 2024

Asifnagar, Hyderabad has issued a family member certificate showing the names of 1. Smt. Syeda Meher Firdous, 2. Smt. Syeda

Waseem Firdous, 3. Syed Shah Mohd. Ali Ghazi and 4. Syed Iftequar

Ali Khan which is not considered by the authorities and advised the plaintiffs to go and approach a civil court to get a legal heir certificate. Accordingly the plaintiffs approached the 2nd defendant and submitted the application to issue a legal heir certificate, but the 2nd defendant never acted upon the application filed by the plaintiffs.

Hence, the plaintiffs have no other option except to approach this

Hon’ble Court to seek a relief of declaration that the plaintiffs are the

legal heirs of the deceased Late Abdul Haq Khan. Hence the suit.

9.In order to substantiate the claim of the plaintiffs, plaintiff

No.6 (Smt. Syeda Habeeba Firdous) examined herself as PW1 and filed her chief affidavit in lieu of chief examination by reiterating the contents in the plaint. In order to substantiate her contentions, she relied on the documents under Exs. A1 to A4 they are 1. Ex. A1 is the original Death certificate of Syed Khader Ali Khan, Dated 03.01.2024, 2. Ex. A2 is the Original Death Certificate of Syed Shah

Mohd Al Ghazi, dated 20.05.2023, 3. Ex. A3 is the Original Death

Certificate of Syed Meher Firdous, dated 08.11.2021 and 4. Ex. A4 is

Page No. 9 O. S. No. 4157 of 2024

the Certified copy of the Judgment in LGC 214/95, dated 16.03.2006.

Further Plaintiff No. 9 (Syed Habeeb Uddin Hussain) examined himself as PW2 and filed his chief affidavit in lieu of chief examination by reiterating the contents in the plaint. In order to substantiate his contentions, he relied on the documents under Exs.

A5 to A6 i.e., Ex. A5 is the Notarized copy of family member certificate of Syed Khader Ali Khan, dated 07.09.2002 (taken as

Secondary evidence as per the orders passed in IA), Ex. A6 is the

Photostat copy of the Will, dated 07.01.1898 (Taken as secondary evidence as per the orders passed in IA No. 358/2024) and further

Plaintiff No. 7 (Syeda Afshan Firdous) examined herself as PW3 and filed her chief affidavit in lieu of chief examination and reiterated the contents and she relied on documents marked under Exs. A7 to A21.

Ex. A7 is the Original Death Certificate of Late Syeda Meher

Firdous, dated 08.11.2024, Ex. A8 is the Original Death Certificate of Late Syed Khader Ali Khan, dated 03.01.2024, Ex. A9 is the

Original Death Certificate of Late Syeda Najeebunnisa, dated 29.08.2024, Ex. A10 is the Original Death Certificate of Late Syed

Page No. 10 O. S. No. 4157 of 2024

Shah Mohammed Al Ghazi, dated 20.05.2023, Ex. A11 is the

Original Death certificate of Late Syeda Rehmath Unnisa, dated 22.01.2024, Ex. A12 is the Original Burial Ground report Late Syed

Sardar Ali Khan, dated 01.11.1942, Ex. A13 is the Original Marriage certificate of Syed Shah Mohammed Al Ghazi, dated 21.01.1988, Ex.

A14 is the Attested copy of Marriage Certificate of Syed Khader Ali

Khan, dated 13.02.2001, Ex. A15 is the Attested copy of Marriage

Certificate of Nawab Syed Sardar Ali Khan, Dated 02.02.2001, Ex.

A16 is the Original PAN Card bearing No. ALAPF7080Q of Mr.

Syed Shah Mohammed Al Faiyaz, Ex. A17 is the Original Aadhar

Card No. 8993 8630 6229 ad Original PAN Card bearing No.

EFQPA2564N of Mr. Syed Ahmed Ali Khan, Ex. A18 is the Original

Aadhar Card No. 4813 2889 6876 and Original PAN Card bearing

No. EMTPS7187B of Mr. Syed Qadar Ali Khan, Ex. A19 is the

Original Aadhar Card No. 9432 1300 0035 and Original PAN Card bearing No. ENYPR3567L of Mr. Syed Rafe Ali Khan, Ex. A20 is the Original Aadhar Card No. 5095 9386 8499 of Mrs. Syeda

Habeeba Firdous and Ex. A21 is the Original Aadhar Card No. 5231

Page No. 11 O. S. No. 4157 of 2024

3261 0844. Upon perusal of the Exhibit A12 stands proved that the

Late Syed Sardar Ali Khan is the legal heir of the Late Sri Syed

Abdul Haq Khan who died on 30.04.1896.

10.The evidence of PW1, PW2 and PW3 coupled with documents under Exs.A1 to A21 clearly establish that plaintiffs are the legal heirs and successors of deceased Late Syed Abdul Haq Khan. On the other hand, the defendants failed to contest the matter, so an adverse inference can be drawn out against the defendants for not contesting the matter. Moreover, this Court did not receive any objections from the public with regard to the claim of the plaintiffs.

There is no rebuttal evidence against the claim of the plaintiffs.

Hence the claim of the plaintiffs are successfully proved.

11.In the result, the suit is decreed, declaring the plaintiffs

Nos. 1 to 14 are the legal heirs of Late Syed Abdul Haq Khan, for the purpose of legal status only. No costs.

Typed to my dictation by the Typist, corrected and pronounced by me in the open Court on this the 04th day of November, 2025.

Sd/-

XIX JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE

FAC: XXII JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE,

CITY CIVIL COURT HYDERABAD.

Page No. 12 O. S. No. 4157 of 2024

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

WITNESSES EXAMINED

For Plaintiffs:For Defendants: PW1 :Smt. Kareem UnnisaNil

PW2 : Mr. Syed Habeeb Uddin Hussaini

PW3 : Mrs. Syeda Afshan Firdous

Documents marked on behalf of Plaintiffs :

Ex.A1: Original Death Certificate of Syed Khader Ali Khan, Dated 03.01.2024.

Ex.A2: Original Death Certificate of Syed Shah Mohd Al Ghazi, dated 20.05.2023.

Ex.A3: Original Death Certificate of Syed Meher Firdous, dated 08.11.2021.

Ex.A4: Certified copy of the Judgment in LGC 214/95, dated 16.03.2006.

Ex.A5: Notarized copy of family member certificate of Syed Khader

Ali Khan, dated 07.09.2002.

Ex.A6: Photostat copy of the WILL, dated 07.01.1898 (taken as sec- ondary evidence as per the orders passed in IA No.

358/2024).

Ex.A7: Original Death certificate of Late Syeda Meher Firdous, dated

Page No. 13 O. S. No. 4157 of 2024

08.11.2024.

Ex.A8: Original Death Certificate of Late Syed Khader Ali Khan,

dated 03.01.2024.

Ex.A9: Original Death Certificate of Late Syeda Najeebunnisha, dated 29.08.2024.

Ex.A10: Original Death Certificate of Late Syed Shah Mohammed Al

Ghazi, dated 20.05.2023.

Ex.A11: Original Death Certificate of Late Syeda Rehmath Unnisa,

dated 22.01.2024.

Ex.A12: Original Burial Ground Report of Lae Syed Sardar Ali Khan, dated 01.11.1942.

Ex.A13: Original Marriage Certificate of Syed Shah Mohammed Al Ghazi,

dated 21.01.1988.

Ex.A14: Attested copy of Marriage Certificate of Syed Khader Ali Khan,

dated 13.02.2001.

Ex.A15: Attested copy of Marriage certificate of Nawab Syed Sardar Ali

Khan, dated 02.02.2001.

Ex.A16: Original PAN Card bearing No. ALAPF7080Q of Mr. Syed Shah

Mohammed Al Faiyaz.

Ex.A17: Original Aadhar Card No. 8993 8630 6229 and Original PAN Card bearing No. EFQPA2564N of Mr. Syed Ahmed Ali Khan.

Page No. 14 O. S. No. 4157 of 2024

Ex.A18: Original Aadhar Card No. 4813 2889 6876 and Original Pan Card bearing No. EMTPS7187B of Mr. Syed Qadar Ali Khan.

Ex.A19: Original Aadhar Card No. 9432 1300 0035 and Original PAN Card bearing No. ENYPR3567L of Mr. Syed Rafe Ali Khan.

Ex.A20: Original Aadhar Card No. 5095 9386 8499 of Mrs. Syeda Habeeba

Firdous.

Ex.A21: Original Aadhar Card No. 5231 3261 0844.

Documents marked on behalf of Defendants : -- NIL--

Sd/-

XIX JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE

FAC: XXII JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE,

CITY CIVIL COURT, HYDERABAD.

IN THE COURT OF THE XXII JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE, CITY CIVIL COURT

HYDERABAD.

PRESENT:Sri N. RAMA CHANDRA RAO,

XIX JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE,

FAC: XXII JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE,

CITY CIVIL COURT, HYDERABAD

MONDAY, DATED THIS THE 02nd DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2026

ORIGINAL SUIT No. 5286 OF 2024

Between:

1.K. Ram Bai (Died per LR’s)

W/o. Late K. Bhavani Singh,

Aged abut 72 years, Occ: Household,

R/o. H. No. 9-5-114, Ramdevaguda,

I. B. Lines, Golconda Mandal,

Hyderabad District, Telangana.

(LRs No. 2 to 14 as per orders in IA No. 345/2025,

dated 23.12.2025)

K. Munna Bai, W/o. Late K. Kishan Singh, 2. aged about 59 years, Occ: Housewife,

R/o. H. No. 9-5-114, Ramdevaguda,

I. B. Lines, Golconda Mandal,

Hyderabad District, Telangana.

K. Manoj Kumar Singh, S/o. Late K. Kishan Singh, 3. aged about 44 years, Occ: Retd., Indian Army,

R/o. H. No. 9-5-114, Ramdevaguda,

I. B. Lines, Golconda Mandal,

Hyderabad District, Telangana.

XXII JCJ, CCC, HYD

2 OS. No. 5286 OF 2024

K. Arun Kumar Singh, S/o. Late K. Kishan Singh, 4. aged about 42 years, Occ: Pvt., Service,

R/o. H. No. 9-5-114, Ramdevaguda,

I. B. Lines, Golconda Mandal,

Hyderabad District, Telangana.

K. Prabha Latha, W/o. J. Narayan Singh, 5. D/o. Late K. Kishan Singh, aged about 39 years,

Occ: Housewife, R/o. H. No. Plot No. 61,

Flat No. G-2, ASR Mani Residency, Vivekananda Nagar, Kukatpally, Medchal-Malkajgiri District - 500072.

6.K. Vijay Kumar, S/o. Late K. Kishan Singh, aged about 37 years, Occ: Pvt., Service, R/o. H. No. 9-5-114, Ramdevaguda,

I. B. Lines, Golconda Mandal,

Hyderabad District, Telangana.

K. Ganga Bai, W/o. Late K. Rajender Singh, 7. aged about 57 years, Occ: Housewife,

R/o. H. No. 9-5-100/A, Ramdevguda,

Hyderabad -500031.

K. Santosh Singh, S/o. Late K. Rajender Singh, 8. aged about 39 years, Occ: Service,

R/o. H. No. 9-5-100/A, Ramdevguda,

Hyderabad -500031.

K. Satish Singh, S/o. Late K. Rajender Singh, 9. Aged about 38 years, Occ: Business,

R/o. H. No. 9-5-100/A, Ramdevguda,

Hyderabad -500031.

XXII JCJ, CCC, HYD

3 OS. No. 5286 OF 2024

K. Sanjay Singh, S/o. Late K. Rajender Singh, 10. aged about 37 years, Occ:Service,

R/o. H. No. 9-5-100/A, Ramdevguda,

Hyderabad -500031.

K. Shankar Singh, S/o. Late K. Bhavani Singh, 11. aged about 54 years, Occ: Diary Business,

R/o. H. No. 9-5-114, Ramdevaguda, I B Lines,

Golconda Mandal, Hyderabad District, Telangana.

B. Munna Bai, D/o. Late K. Bhavani Singh, 12. W/o. B. Shankar Singh, aged about 50 years,

Occ: Household,

R/o. Chebarthy Village, Markuk Mandal,

New Siddipet District, Telangana State.

K. Satyanarayana Singh, S/o. Late K. Bhavani Singh, 13. Aged about 49 years, Occ: Retd., Indian Army

R/o. H. No. 9-5-114, Ramdevaguda, I B Lines,

Golconda Mandal, Hyderabad District, Telangana.

K. Dharam Singh, S/o. Late. K. Bhavai Singh, 14. aged about 45 years, Occ: Advocate,

R/o. H. No. 9-5-114, Ramdevaguda, I B Lines,

Golconda Mandal, Hyderabad District, Telangana.

(Amendment carried out vide IA No. 345 of 2025,

dated 23.12.2025).

… Plaintiffs

A N D

1.THE TAHSILDAR, Golconda Mandal, Hyderabad District.

2.To All Concerned.

… DEFENDANTS

XXII JCJ, CCC, HYD

4 OS. No. 5286 OF 2024

This suit is coming before me on 06.01.2026 for final hearing in the presence of Sri K. Pandu Ranga Reddy, learned

Counsel for the plaintiffs and defendants were set exparte and the matter having stood over for consideration to this day, this court delivered the following.

J U D G M E N T

1.This suit is filed by the plaintiffs to declare Plaintiffs No. 2 to 14 as the Legal heirs of Late K. Bhavani Singh and K. Ram Bai for the purpose of legal status vide amendment petition IA No. 345 of 2025, dated 23.12.2025.

2. The Brief averments of the plaint are as follows :-

The plaintiffs No. 2 to 14 submit that K. Bhavani Singh married to K. Ram Bai who is plaintiff No. 1 herein and they were blessed with five sons and one daughter namely 1. K. Kishan

Singh(Died), 2. K. Rajender Singh (Died), 3. K. Shanker Singh (Plaintiff No. 11), 4. B. Munna Bai (Plaintiff NO. 12), 5. K.

Satyanarayana Singh (Plaintiff No. 13) and 6. K. Dharam Singh (Plaintiff No. 14) and further submitted that the K. Kishan Singh died on 15.07.2022 due to Cardiac Arrest by leaving behind his successors and lineal descendants namely 1. K. Munna Bai (Wife) who is (Plaintiff No. 2), K. Manoj Kumar Singh (Plaintiff No. 3), K.

XXII JCJ, CCC, HYD

5 OS. No. 5286 OF 2024

Arun Kumar Singh (Plaintiff No. 4), Prabhalatha (Plaintiff No. 5) and

K. Vijay Kumar Singh (Plaintiff No. 6). K. Rajender Singh has also died on 29.06.2021 leaving behind K. Ganga Bai (Plaintiff No.7), K.

Santosh Singh (Plaintiff No. 8), K. Sathish Singh (Plaintiff No. 9) and

K. Sanjay Singh (Plaintiff NO. 10) as his legal heirs and lineal descendants.

3. The plaintiffs submit that the K. Bhavani Singh who is the husband of the plaintiff No. 1 and father plaintiffs Nos. 11 to 14 and father-in-law of plaintiff No. 2 and 7 and Grand father of

Plaintiff No. 3 to 6 and plaintiff No. 8 to 10 who expired on 25.10.2018 due to old age and ailments at Ramdevaguda, IB Lines,

Golconda Mandal, Hyderabad District leaving behind the plaintiffs as only his legal heirs and lineal descendants. Plaintiffs after demise of the Late K. Bhavani Singh approached the concerned

Tahsildar, Golconda Mandal, Hyderabad in year 2021 who is the defendant No. 1 with a request to issue the legal heirs certificate and family members certificate, but the defendant No. 1 has orally refused to issue legal heir certificate suggesting that they will issue the legal heirs certificate to Government employees, who died during their service but the deceased Late K. Bhavani Singh is

XXII JCJ, CCC, HYD

6 OS. No. 5286 OF 2024 an agriculturist, as such they advised to obtain from competent civil court. It is submitted that the plaintiffs having no other remedy except to knock the doors of this Hon’ble Court seeking the relief of declaration to declare plaintiffs No. 2 to 14 only the legal heirs of Late K. Bhavani Singh and K. Ram Bai (as per the amendment petition IA No. 345/2025, dated 23.12.2025) as otherwise the plaintiffs No. 2 to 14 will be put to irreparable loss and injury which cannot be compensated later. Hence, the suit.

4. After service of summons, Defendant No.1 did not enter his appearance and as such Defendant No.1 was set exparte. Paper publication was issued calling for objection from all concerned (defendant No. 2) but nobody put forth any objection. Hence

Defendant No.2 was also set exparte.

5. During the trail of suit, Plaintiff No. 14 (K. Dharam Singh) was examined as PW1 and through PW1, Exhibits A1 to A11 were marked. Since, defendants remained exparte, PW1 was not cross examined. No evidence was also adduced on behalf of the defendants, since they remained exparte. After conclusion of trail,

Plaintiffs’ counsel submitted arguments.

XXII JCJ, CCC, HYD

7 OS. No. 5286 OF 2024

6.Now the points for determination are :-

1. Whether the plaintiffs No. 2 to 14 are entitled to be declared as legal heirs of Late. K. Bhavani Singh and K.

Ram Bai as prayed for ?

2. To what relief ?

7.POINT :- It is the contention of the plaintiffs that they are the only legal heirs of Late. K. Bhavani Singh and K. Ram Bai who died on 25.10.2018 and 09.01.2025. The evidence of PW1 is replica of plaint averments. Hence the same is not reproduced here to avoid repetition of facts. The plaintiff No.14 is examined as PW1.

Late K. Bhavani Singh and Late K. Ram Bai were died leaving behind plaintiffs No. 2 to 14 as their legal heirs. Through PW1,

Ex.A1 to Ex.A11 were marked. The plaintiffs No. 2 to 14 are claiming to be the legal heirs of the deceased Late K. Bhavani

Singh and Late K. Ram Bai as per the amendment petition IA No.

345/2025, dated 23.12.2025.

8. In order to prove their claim, the plaintiffs have filed Ex.A1,

A2 and A3 which are the Certified copies of Death certificates of

Late. K. Bhavani Singh, Late K. Kishan Singh and Late K. Rajender

XXII JCJ, CCC, HYD

8 OS. No. 5286 OF 2024

Singh shows that they died on 25.10.2018, 15.07.2022 and 29.06.2021 respectively.

9.Ex.A4 is the Original receipt filed before Tahsildar Golconda

Mandal, Meeseva receipt which shows that which shows that Late

K. Ram Bai applied for death certificates of Late K. Bhavani Singh,

Late K. Kishan Singh and Late K. Rajender Singh.

10.Ex.A5 is the certified copy of the Death Certificate of Plaintiff

No. 1 i.e., K. Ram Bai which shows that she died on 09.01.2025. It also shows Late K. Bhavani Singh as her husband.

11. Ex. A6 and A10 are the Original Aadhar Cards of Plaintiff

Nos. 1, 12 and 14 is shows that Plaintiff No. 1 is the wife and

Plaintiff No. 12 as daughter and Plaintiff No. 14 as son of the deceased.

12.Ex. A7 is Original Voter ID Card of Plaintiff No. 14 shows that the Plaintiff No. 14 is the son of deceased Late K. Bhavani Singh and Late K. Ram Bai.

13.Ex. A8 is the Original Aadhar Cards of all the plaintiffs shows that the Late K. Bhavani Singh and late K. Ram Bai is the parents of

Plaintiffs No. 11, 12, 13, Father-in-law of plaintiff No. 2 and 7 and

XXII JCJ, CCC, HYD

9 OS. No. 5286 OF 2024

Grand Father of Plaintiff No. 3 to 6 and Plaintiff No. 8 to 10.

14.Ex. A9 is the Original Pan Card of Plaintiff No. 5 shows that

Plaintiff No. 5 is the grand son of the Late K. Bhavani Singh and

Late K. Ram Bai.

15. EX. A11 is the Original S. S. C Memorandum of marks of K.

Munna Bai (Plaintiff No. 2) is the grand daughter of the deceased

Late K. Bhavani Singh and Late K. Ram Bai.

Hence, on perusal of Ex. A1 to A11 shows that Plaintiffs No.

2 to 14 are the legal heirs of Late K. Bhavani Singh and K. Ram Bai.

16.The above oral and documentary evidence remained unchallenged, Since the defendants did not choose to contest the suit. On a careful consideration of the above evidence, this court is of the opinion that the said evidence clinchingly established the claim put forth by the plaintiffs that plaintiffs No. 2 to 14 are the legal heirs of the Late K. Bhavani Singh and Late K. Ram Bai.

Therefore, they are entitled to seek the relief of declaration of the legal status as sought for by them. Point is answered accordingly.

XXII JCJ, CCC, HYD

10 OS. No. 5286 OF 2024

17. IN THE RESULT, the suit of the plaintiffs is decreed without cost. There shall be declaration as regards the legal status of the plaintiffs No. 2 to 14 that they are the legal heirs of the deceased

Late K. Bhavani Singh and Late K. Ram Bai.

Typed to my dictation, corrected and pronounced by me in open court on this the 02 nd day of February, 2026.

Sd/-

XIX JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE

FAC: XXII JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE,

CITY CIVIL COURT, HYDERABAD.

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

WITNESS EXAMINED

PLAINTIFF DEFENDANT

PW1 K. Dharam Singh- Nil -

DOCUMENTS MARKED

PLAINTIFFS

Ex.A1Certified copy of death certificate of Late K. Bhavani Singh

Ex.A2Certified copy of death certificate of Late K. Kishan Singh.

Ex.A3Certified copy of death certificate of Late K. Rajender Singh.

Original Receipt filed before Tahsildar Golconda Mandal, Ex.A4 Meeseva receipt.

XXII JCJ, CCC, HYD

11 OS. No. 5286 OF 2024

Certified copy of death certificate of Plaintiff No. 1. I.e, K. Ex.A5 Ram Bai.

Original Aadhar Cards of Plaintiff Nos. 1 and 12. Ex.A6

Original Voter ID card of Plaintiff No. 14. Ex.A7

Ex.A8Original Aadhar Cards of all the plaintiffs.

Ex.A9Original Pan Cards of Plaintiff. No. 5.

Ex.A10Original Aadhar Card of plaintiff No. 14.

Ex.A11Original S. S. C memorandum of marks of K. Munna Bai.

DOCUMENTS MARKED

DEFENDANTS

- Nil -

Sd/-

XIX JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE,

FAC: XXII JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE,

CITY CIVIL COURT, HYDERABAD.

XXII JCJ, CCC, HYD

IN THE COURT OF THE XXII JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE,

CITY CIVIL COURT, HYDERABAD

TUESDAY, DATED THIS THE 28th DAY OF OCTOBER, 2025

PRESENT : Sri N. RAMACHANDRA RAO

XIX JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE

FAC: XXII JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE

CITY CIVIL COURT, HYDERABAD

OS. No. 3064 of 2 0 2 5

Between :

1. Nahid Sultana, W/o. Late Ghulam Mahboob Siddiqui, aged about 67 years, Occ: Home Maker R/o. 9-4-61/A/100, Nizam Colony, Tolichowki, Hyderabad.

2. Ghulam Dastagiri Siddiqui, S/o. Late Ghulam Mahboob Siddiqui, Aged about 48 years, Occ: Business, R/o. 9-4-61/A/100, Nizam Colony, Tolichowki, Hyderabad.

3. Ghulam Ather Siddiqui, S/o. Late Ghulam Mahboob Siddiqui, aged about 39 years, Occ: Business, R/o. 9-4-61/A/100, Nizam Colony, Tolichowki, Hyderabad.

4. Ghulam Taher Siddiqui, S/o. Late Ghulam Mahboob Siddiqui, aged about 43 years, Occ: Business, R/o. Flat No. 1005, 10th Floor, Avalon Apartment, Nanal Nagar, Hyderabad.

Cont’d….

Page No. 2 O. S. No. 3064 of 2025

5. Rukhia Sultana, D/o. Late Ghulam Mahboob Sidiqui, aged about 50 years, Occ: Home Maker, R/o. 8-1-398/P/233, Paramount Hill, Towlichowki, Hyderabad.

6. Aqeela Sultana, D/o. Late Ghulam Mahboob Siddiqui, aged about 40 years, Occ: Home Maker, R/o. 9-4-61/A/100, Nizam Colony, Tolichowki, Hyderabad.

7. Butool Fatima, D/o. Late Ghulam Mahbob Siddiqui, Aged about 38 years, Occ: Home Maker, R/o. 9-4-61/A/100, Nizam Colony, Tolichowki, Hyderabad.

8. Amina Sultana, D/o. Late Ghulam Mahboob Siddiqui, Aged about 35 years, Occ: Home Maker, R/o. 9-4-61/A/100, Nizam Colony, Tolichowki, Hyderabad.

9. Ayesha Sultana, D/o. Late Ghulam Mahboob Siddiqui, Aged about 35 years, Occ: Home Maker, R/o. 9-4-61/A/100, Nizam Colony,

Tolichowki, Hyderabad.... Plaintiffs

AND

1.The MRO/Tahsildar, Golconda Mandal, 13-6-823/6/A, Fort Road, Mehdi Colony, Langer House, Hyderabad, T. S. - 500008.

2. To All Concerned...Defendants

Cont’d….

Page No. 3 O. S. No. 3064 of 2025

This suit is coming before me for final hearing in the presence of Sri Marvan Babar, Advocate for the Plaintiffs, and Defendants Nos.1 and 2 were set 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.This isasuitfordeclarationfiledby the plaintiffs to declare them as the legal heirs of Late Ghulam Mahboob Siddiqui.

The brief averments of the plaint are as follows:

2.Plaintiffs submit that, Late Ghulam Mahboob Siddiqui married plaintiff No. 1 and they were blessed with (3) sons i.e., Plaintiffs No.

2 to 4 and (5) daughters i.e., plaintiffs No. 5 to 9. Late Ghulam

Mahboob Siddiqui died on 09.11.2018 leaving behind the plaintiffs herein as their sole and absolute legal heirs and the plaintiffs are the only surviving legal heirs of Late. Ghulam Mahboob Siddiqui.

Plaintiffs further submit that, Late Ghulam Mahboob Siddiqui was the sole and absolute owner of property bearing Plot No. 08, admeasuring 536 Sq. Yards in Sy. No. 73/P situated at Budvel

Village, Rajendra Nagar Mandal, Ranga Reddy District vide registered sale deed bearing Doc. No. 2242/2011, dated 06.06.2011 puchased from M/s. Janachaitanya Housing Pvt., Ltd., where in the plaintiffs had also executed partition deed bearing Doc. No.

Page No. 4 O. S. No. 3064 of 2025

10618/2019, dated 31.10.2019.

3.Plaintiffs further submit that, Plaintiff No. 1 on her behalf as well as on behalf of plaintiffs No. 2 to 9 on 29.05.2025 approached the defendant No. 1 for obtaining the legal heir certificate but the defendant No. 1 refused to provide the same to the plaintiffs stating that they have no powers to issue legal heir certificate, and directed the plaintiffs to approach appropriate court for obtaining the legal heir certificate. At this juncture, the plaintiffs have no other efficacious remedy except approaching this Hon’ble Court with the present suit for declaration to declare the plaintiffs as the legal heirs of deceased Late Ghulam Mahboob Siddiqui for legal status only.

4.After registering the suit, summons were issued to the defendants. Summons served to defendant No.1. The Defendant No.1 was called absent and as there was no representation, the defendant No.1 was set ex-parte. The Defendant No.2 is shown as “All Concerned”. A paper publication was made inviting objections if any, in the matter from the public, but no objections were received. Hence defendant No.2 was set ex-parte.

5.During the course of trial, Ghulam Taher Siddiqui (Plaintiff

No. 4) examined himself as PW1 and got marked Exs. A1 to A21

Page No. 5 O. S. No. 3064 of 2025

documents.

6.Heard the Counsel for plaintiffs and perused the record.

“Now the point for determination is whether the plaintiffs are entitled to be declared as the legal heirs of

Late Ghulam Mahboob Siddiqui?”

POINT : Sri Ghulam Mahboob Siddiqui 09.11.2018 leaving behind the plaintiffs herein as their sole and absolute legal heirs and plaintiffs are the only surviving legal heirs of Late Ghulam, Mahboob

Siddiqui. Plaintiff No. 1 is the wife and Plaintiffs No. 2 to 4 are the sons and Plaintiffs No. 5 to 9 are the daughters. Late Ghulam

Mahboob Siddiqui was purchased the property bearing Plot No. 08 admeasuring 536 sq. yards in Sy. No. 73/P situated at Budvel

Village, Rejendra Nagar Mandal, Ranga Reddy District. On 29.05.2025 plaintiffs approached the defendant No. 1 for getting the legal heir certificate but the defendant No.1 refused to provide the same to the plaintiffs stating that they have no powers to issue legal heir certificate and directed the plaintiff to approach appropriate court for obtaining the legal heir certificate. In the above

Page No. 6 O. S. No. 3064 of 2025

circumstances, the plaintiffs have no other efficacious remedy except approaching this Hon’ble Court with the present suit for declaration to declare the plaintiffs as the legal heirs of deceased Late Ghulam

Mahboob Siddiqui for the legal status only.

7.In order to substantiate the claim of the plaintiffs, plaintiff

No.4 (Ghulam Taher Siddiqui) examined himself as PW1 and filed her chief affidavit in lieu of chief examination by reiterating the contents in the plaint. In order to substantiate her contentions, she relied on the documents under Exs. A1 to A21. Ex. A1 is the Original

Death certificate of Late Ghulam Mahboob Siddiqui, Ex. A2 is the

Aadhar Card of Late Ghulam Mahboob Siddiqui, Ex. A3 is the PAN

Card of Late Ghulam Mahboob Siddiqui, Ex. A4 is the Aadhar Card of Plaintiff No. 1, Ex. A5 is the Aadhar Card of Plaintiff No. 2, Ex.

A6 is the Bank pass book of Plaintiff No. 3, Ex. A7 is the Aadhar

Card of Plaintiff No. 4, Ex. A8 is the Aadhar Card of Plaintiff No. 5,

Ex. A9 is the Aadhar Card of Plaintiff No. 6, Ex. A10 is the Aadhar

Card of Plaintiff No. 7, Ex. A11 is the Aadhar Card of Plaintiff No.

8, Ex. A12 is the Aadhar Card of Plaintiff No. 9, Ex. A13 is the PAN

Page No. 7 O. S. No. 3064 of 2025

Card of Plaintiff No. 1, Ex. A14 is the PAN Card of Plaintiff No. 2,

Ex. A15 is the Artisan Photo ID Card of Plaintiff No. 3, Ex. A16 is the PAN Card of plaintiff No. 4, Ex. A17 is the PAN Card of

Plaintiff No. 5, Ex. A18 is the PAN Card of Plaintiff No. 6, Ex. A19 is the PAN Card of Plaintiff No. 7, Ex. A20 is the PAN Card of the

Plaintiff No. 8, Ex. A21 is the PAN Card of Plaintiff No. 9. Upon perusal of the Exhibit A1 stands proved that the Sri Ghulam

Mahboob Siddiqui died on 09.11.2018.

8.Further, on perusal of the Exhibits A1 and A13 stands proved that the Plaintiff No. 1 is the wife of the deceased Late Ghulam

Mahboob Siddiqui, Exhibits A5 & A14, A6 & A15, A7 & A16 stands proved that the Plaintiffs Nos. 2 and 4 are the sons and

Exhibits A8 & A17, A9 & A18, A10 & A19, A11 & A20 and A12 &

A21 stands proved that the Plaintiff No. 5 to 9 are the daughters of the deceased Late Ghulam Mahboob Siddiqui.

9.The evidence of PW1 coupled with documents under Exs.A1 to A21 clearly establish that plaintiff No.1 is the wife, Plaintiff

No. 2 to 4 are the sons and Plaintiff No. 5 to 9 are the daughters of

Page No. 8 O. S. No. 3064 of 2025

Late Ghulam Mahboob Siddiqui. On the other hand, the defendants failed to contest the matter, so an adverse inference can be drawn out against the defendants for not contesting the matter. Moreover, this Court did not receive any objections from the public with regard to the claim of the plaintiffs. There is no rebuttal evidence against the claim of the plaintiffs. Hence the claim of the plaintiffs are successfully proved.

10.In the result, the suit is decreed, declaring the plaintiffs

Nos. 1 to 9 are the legal heirs of Late Ghulam Mahboob Siddiqui, for the purpose of legal status only. No costs.

Typed to my dictation by the Typist, corrected and pronounced by me in the open Court on this the 28th day of October, 2025.

Sd/-

XIX JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE

FAC: XXII JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE,

CITY CIVIL COURT HYDERABAD.

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

WITNESSES EXAMINED

For Plaintiffs:For Defendants: PW1 :Mr. Ghulam Taher SiddiquiNil

Documents marked on behalf of Plaintiffs :

Ex. A1 is the Original Death certificate of Late Ghulam Mahboob Sid-

Page No. 9 O. S. No. 3064 of 2025

diqui,

Ex. A2 is the Aadhar Card of Late Ghulam Mahboob Siddiqui,

Ex. A3 is the PAN Card of Late Ghulam Mahboob Siddiqui,

Ex. A4 is the Aadhar Card of Plaintiff No. 1,

Ex. A5 is the Aadhar Card of Plaintiff No. 2,

Ex. A6 is the Bank pass book of Plaintiff No. 3,

Ex. A7 is the Aadhar Card of Plaintiff No. 4,

Ex. A8 is the Aadhar Card of Plaintiff No. 5,

Ex. A9 is the Aadhar Card of Plaintiff No. 6,

Ex. A10 is the Aadhar Card of Plaintiff No. 7,

Ex. A11 is the Aadhar Card of Plaintiff No. 8,

Ex. A12 is the Aadhar Card of Plaintiff No. 9,

Ex. A13 is the PAN Card of Plaintiff No. 1,

Ex. A14 is the PAN Card of Plaintiff No. 2,

Ex. A15 is the Artisan Photo ID Card of Plaintiff No. 3,

Ex. A16 is the PAN Card of plaintiff No. 4,

Ex. A17 is the PAN Card of Plaintiff No. 5,

Ex. A18 is the PAN Card of Plaintiff No. 6,

Ex. A19 is the PAN Card of Plaintiff No. 7,

Ex. A20 is the PAN Card of the Plaintiff No. 8,

Ex. A21 is the PAN Card of Plaintiff No. 9.

Page No. 10 O. S. No. 3064 of 2025

Documents marked on behalf of Defendants : -- NIL--

Sd/-

XIX JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE

FAC: XXII JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE,

CITY CIVIL COURT, HYDERABAD.

O.S. No.112 OF 2026 13.05.2026 1 OF 7

IN THE COURT OF THE XIX JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE, CITY CIVIL COURT

HYDERABAD.

PRESENT : SRI. RAMA CHANDRA RAO NADENDLA

XIX JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE, CITY CIVIL COURT, HYDERABAD.

WEDNESDAY, DATED THIS THE 13 TH DAY OF MAY, 2026

ORIGINAL SUIT NO. 112 OF 2026

Between :

1.Syed Sulaman Ather, S/o Late Syed Mahmood Mubarak, Age : 46 years, Occ : Private Service, R/o H.No. 16-11-16/P/C/A, Saleem Nagar, Malakpet, Hyderabad – 500 036.

2.Syed Ibrahim Khaleel, S/o Late Syed Mahmood Mubarak, Age : 45 years, Occ : Private Service, R/o H.No. 16-11-16/P/C/A, Saleem Nagar, Malakpet, Hyderabad – 500 036.

3.Yusra Fatima, D/o Late Syed Mahmood Mubarak, W/o M.A. Asif, Age : 43 years, Occ : Household, R/o H.No. 9 and 10, M H Compound, Jawans Road, Bellary, Karnataka – 583102.

4.Sara Mubeen, D/o Late Syed Mahmood Mubarak, W/o Mohd. Amir Siddiqui, Age : 32 years, Occ : Household, R/o H.No. 16-11-16/P/C/A, Saleem Nagar, Malakpet, Hyderabad – 500 036.

Plaintiffs no.2 to 4 are represented by their GPA Holder, namely Plaintiff No.1 herein.

... Plaintiffs

A N D

1.The Tahsildar (M.R.O), Sayeedabad Mandal, Saidabad, Hyderabad.

2.To All Concerned. … Defendants

This suit has come up before me on 24.04.2026 for final hearing in the presence of

Dr.S.B. Md. Irfan Ali Abbas, the learned advocate counsel for the plaintiffs and defendants were set exparte and the matter having stood over for consideration to this day, this court delivered the following :

: : J U D G M E N T : :

1.This suit is filed for declaration, to declare that plaintiffs as legal heirs of Late Smt.

Rehana Mubarak, W/o Syed Mahmood Mubarak and Late Sri. Syed Mahmood Mubarak,

os. NO.112 OF 2026 13.05.2026 2 OF 7

S/o Syed Abdur Rahman, who died on 19.03.2019 and 10.01.2021 respectively.

Brief averments of the plaint are that :-

2.Parents of plaintiffs, Late Smt. Rehana Mubarak (mother) died on 19.03.2019 and

Late Sri. Syed Mahmood Mubarak (father) died on 10.01.2021 respectively. During their lifetime, deceased were blessed with two sons (plaintiffs no.1 and 2 herein) and two daughters (plaintiffs no.3 and 4 herein) and were permanent residents of Malakpet,

Amberpet Mandal, Hyderabad District.

3.Further submits that mother of plaintiffs, namely Late Smt. Rehana Mubarak, W/o

Syed Mahmood Mubarak died on 19.03.2019 leaving behind her husband, two sons and two daughters as her only surviving legal heirs and successors in respect of movable and immovable properties including the open land bearing Plot No. 2, admeasuring 267

Sq.yards equivalent to 223.24 Sq.metres, in Survey No. 14, Ward No.16, Block No.11,

Situated at Moosarambagh, Hyderabad and Shares/Securities of ‘Alpine Housing

Development Corporation Ltd.,’ bearing ISIN : INE84D01015, No. of Units : 40,000 ; in the name of Smt. Rehana Mubarak, W/o Syed Mahamood Mubarak, in her NDSL Demat

Account at HDFC Bank Ltimited with DP ID : IN301549 and Client ID : 52279794.

Subsequently, father of plaintiffs, namely Syed Mahmood Mubarak also died on 10.01.2021 leaving behind the plaintiffs herein as his legal hiers. Thereby, only plaintiffs herein are the only legal heirs of deceased.

4.Plaintiffs no.1 and 2, namely Syed Sulaman Ather and Syed Ibrahim Khaleel are the sons of Late Smt. Rehana Mubarak and Late Sri. Syed Mahmood Mubarak, plaintiffs no.3 and 4, namely Yusra Fatima and Sara Mubeen are the daughters of Late Smt. Rehana

Mubarak and Late Sri. Syed Mahmood Mubarak. Further submits that plaintiffs no.1 and

XIX JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE

os. NO.112 OF 2026 13.05.2026 3 OF 7

2 are the sons, plaintiffs no.3 and 4 are the daughters of Late Smt. Rehana Mubarak and

Late Sri. Syed Mahmood Mubarak, who died on 19.03.2019 and 10.01.2021 respectively, leaving behind the plaintiffs herein as the legal heirs and successors to their entire estate.

Except, plaintiffs there are no other legal heirs to deceased Late Smt. Rehana Mubarak and Late Sri. Syed Mahmood Mubarak.

5.On several occasions, since June 2021, plaintiff no.1 approached the concerned

Tahsildar (MRO), Saidabad Mandal, Hyderabad i.e., defendant no.1 herein requesting for issuance of legal heirs certificate in favour of plaintiffs, being the legal heirs of deceased

Late Smt. Rehana Mubarak and Late Sri. Syed Mahmood Mubarak. But, on 05.01.2025, defendant no.1 orally refused to issue any such certificate in favour of plaintiffs duly stating that neither of the deceased was a Government Employee as such, as per the rules any such certificate cannot be issued and further advised the plaintiffs to obtain orders from Civil Court. Therefore, in the above circumstances, the plaintiffs as per the legal advice having left with no other alternative except to approach the Hon’ble Court filed the suit for declaration of legal heirs. Hence the present suit is filed.

6.After registering the suit, summons were served to defendant no.1. No representation was made by defendant no.1. Summons on defendant no.2 i.e., General public was served through publication in Urdu Daily Newspaper ‘Hamdam’ and report filed on 19.02.2026, to invite objections from the public at large but none appeared denying the plaintiffs’ case or claiming as legal heirs of deceased Late Smt. Rehana

Mubarak and Late Sri. Syed Mahmood Mubarak. Hence, D1 and D2 were set exparte vide order dated 19.02.2026 to the suit proceedings.

7.At the time of trial, the plaintiff no.1 got examined himself as PW1 and got marked Exs.A1 to Ex.A12.

XIX JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE

os. NO.112 OF 2026 13.05.2026 4 OF 7

8. Final Arguments were advanced by Learned Counsel for plaintiffs which was duly considered with evidence on record and the matter was posted for Judgment.

9. Now the points for determination are :-

1. “Whether the plaintiffs are entitled to be declared as legal heirs of Late Smt.

Rehana Mubarak, W/o Syed Mahmood Mubarak and Late Sri. Syed Mahmood

Mubarak, S/o Syed Abdur Rahman, who died on 19.03.2019 and 10.01.2021

respectively as prayed for ?”

2. To what relief ?

10. Point No.1 :- This is a suit filed by the plaintiffs praying to declare them as legal heirs of Late Smt. Rehana Mubarak, W/o Syed Mahmood Mubarak and Late

Sri. Syed Mahmood Mubarak, S/o Syed Abdur Rahman, who died on 19.03.2019 and 10.01.2021 respectively. It is the contention of the plaintiffs that they are the only legal heirs of the deceased persons. To substantiate the case of the plaintiffs, the plaintiff no.1 got examined himself as PW1 by filing his chief examination affidavit.

In lieu of his chief examination, through PW1, Exs.A1 to A12 are marked. The evidence of PW1 is replica of plaint averments. Hence the same is not reproduced here to avoid repetition of facts. From the material on record i.e., the original death certificates i.e., Ex.A1 and Ex.A2, it stands proved that Late Smt. Rehana Mubarak, and Late Sri. Syed Mahmood Mubarak died on 19.03.2019 and 10.01.2021 respectively. Ex.A3 is the original ration card of deceased Late Smt. Rehana

Mubarak. Ex.A4 is the original aadhaar card of deceased Late Smt. Rehana

Mubarak. Ex.A5 is the original aadhaar card of deceased Late Sri. Syed Mahmood

Mubarak. Ex.A6 is the original aadhaar card of plaintiff no.1. Ex.A7 is the original

XIX JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE

os. NO.112 OF 2026 13.05.2026 5 OF 7

aadhaar card of plaintiff no.2. Ex.A8 is the original aadhaar card of plaintiff no.3.

Ex.A9 is the original PAN card of plaintiff no.3. Ex.A10 is the original aadhaar card of plaintiff no.4. Ex.A11 is the certified copy of registered general power of attorney document no. 5281 of 2023 dated 27.07.2023 at SRO, Azampura. Ex.A12 is the certified copy of registered general power of attorney document no. 6752 of 2023

dated 25.09.2023 at SRO, Azampura.

11.On perusal of Ex.A1 and Ex.A4, it stands proved that deceased Late Smt.

Rehana Mubarak and Late Sri. Syed Mahmood Mubarak are wife and husband. From

Ex. A3, Ex.A6 and Ex.A7, it stands proved that plaintiffs no.1 and 2, namely Syed

Sulaman Ather and Syed Ibrahim Khaleel are the sons of Late Smt. Rehana Mubarak and Late Sri. Syed Mahmood Mubarak, Through Ex.A3, Ex.A9 and Ex.A10, it stands proved that plaintiffs no.3 and 4, namely Yusra Fatima and Sara Mubeen are the daughters of Late Smt. Rehana Mubarak and Late Sri. Syed Mahmood Mubarak.

12.Hence, from the material on record, it can be safely concluded that plaintiffs no.1 to 4 are the children of Late Smt. Rehana Mubarak, W/o Syed Mahmood

Mubarak and Late Sri. Syed Mahmood Mubarak, S/o Syed Abdur Rahman and the oral evidence of PW1 coupled with the documentary evidence i.e., Exs.A1 to A12 establishes the relationship of plaintiffs and the deceased persons. Therefore, the plaintiffs being the legal heirs of deceased Late Smt. Rehana Mubarak, W/o Syed

Mahmood Mubarak and Late Sri. Syed Mahmood Mubarak, S/o Syed Abdur Rahman are entitled for declaration as sought for. The point is answered accordingly.

13.IN THE RESULT, the suit of the plaintiffs is decreed without costs, declaring the plaintiffs no.1 to 4 as legal heirs of deceased Late Smt. Rehana

Mubarak, W/o Syed Mahmood Mubarak and Late Sri. Syed Mahmood Mubarak, S/o

XIX JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE

os. NO.112 OF 2026 13.05.2026 6 OF 7

Syed Abdur Rahman and this declaration is only for legal heirs status but not for any other purpose.

Typed to my dictation, corrected and pronounced by me in open court on this the 13th day of May, 2026.

XIX JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE,

CITY CIVIL COURT, HYDERABAD.

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

WITNESS EXAMINED

PLAINTIFFS DEFENDANTS

PW1Sri. Syed Sulaman Ather- Nil -

DOCUMENTS MARKED

PLAINTIFFS DEFENDANTS

Ex.A1Original Death Certificate of Deceased Late Smt. Rehana Mubarak, W/o Syed Mahmood Mubarak, who died on 19.03.2019 issued by GHMC Dated 06.07.2023. Ex.A2Original Death Certificate of Deceased Late Syed Mahmood Mubarak, S/o Syed Abdur Rahman, who died on 10.01.2021 issued by Government of Karnataka, Chief Registrar of Births and Deaths Dated 15.01.2021. Ex.A3Original Ration Card of Deceased Late Smt. Rehana Mubarak. - Nil - Ex.A4Original Aadhaar Card of Deceased Late Smt. Rehana Mubarak. Ex.A5Original Aadhaar Card of Deceased Late Syed Mahmood Mubarak. Ex.A6Original Aadhaar Card of Plaintiff No.1. Ex.A7Original Aadhaar Card of Plaintiff No.2. Ex.A8Original Aadhaar Card of Plaintiff No.3.

XIX JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE

os. NO.112 OF 2026 13.05.2026 7 OF 7

Ex.A9Original PAN Card of Plaintiff No.3. Ex.A10 Original Aadhaar Card of plaintiff no.4. Ex.A11 Certified Copy of Registered General Power of Attorney Document No. 5281 of 2023 Dated 27.07.2023 at SRO, Azampura. Ex.A12 Certified Copy of Registered General Power of Attorney Document No. 6752 of 2023 Dated 25.09.2023 at SRO, Azampura.

XIX JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE,

CITY CIVIL COURT, HYDERABAD.

XIX JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE