Currently Serving

MS S.Prathima

JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE

Junior Civil Judge`s Court, Banaganapalli (Taluka) · Kurnool · Andhra Pradesh

MS S.Prathima, JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE, is posted at Junior Civil Judge`s Court, Banaganapalli (Taluka), Kurnool, Andhra Pradesh, India. 795 court orders on record since 2025. 10 judgments with full text available. Primarily handles OS, CC, EP cases.

795

Total Orders

Judgments

Orders/Month

Postings

Featured Judgments

OS/12/2025

Koppera Prasad vs G.Prathap

20 Feb 2026

O.S.No.12 of 2025 - 1 - Civil Judge Court [J.D], KKL.

IN THE COURT OF THE CIVIL JUDGE [JUNIOR DIVISION]::

KOILAKUNTLA

Present :- Ms. S.Prathima

Civil Judge (Junior Division), Banaganapalle.

Camp at Civil Judge’s Court [Junior Division], Koilakuntla

Dated Friday, the 20 th day of February, 2026

APKU130000122025 ORIGINAL SUIT No. 12 of 2025

Between:

Koppera Prasad, Son of Koppera Esaku, Aged about 37 years, Hindu, Business,

Resident of H.No.1-1, Sowdaradinne Village, Koilakuntla Mandal, Nandyal District.

… PLAINTIFF

And :

Ganamaddula Prathap, Son of G.Obulesu, Aged about 30 years, Hindu, Business,

Resident of Pedda Kopperla Village, Koilakuntla Mandal, Nandyal District.

… DEFENDANT

*** * * * ***

This Suit is coming on 30-01-2026 for Hearing before this Court in the presence of Sri G.L.Narasimhudu and Sri D.Sreenivasulu, Advocates for the

Plaintiff, and the Defendant has been called absent and set ex-parte, and upon hearing the Plaintiff and having stood over for consideration till this day, this Court delivered the following :-

J U D G M E N T

01.This Suit is filed by the Plaintiff for recovery of the Suit Promissory

Notes debt of Rs.1,51,000/- + Rs.1,51,000/- + Rs.1,05,700/-, a totaling

Rs.4,07,700/- [Rupees Four Lakhs Seven Thousand Seven Hundred only] being the Principal and Interest due on the Suit Promissory Notes, Dated 09-10-2022, 09-10-2022 and 09-10-2022 for Rs.1,00,000/- + Rs.1,00,000/- + Rs.70,000/-, a totaling Rs.2,70,000/- [Rupees Two Lakhs Seventy Thousand only] executed by the

O.S.No.12 of 2025 - 2 - Civil Judge Court [J.D], KKL.

Defendant in his favour, agreeing to repay the same with interest at 24%, 24% and at 24% Per Annum and for subsequent interest and costs.

02.The Case of the Plaintiff, as set out in the Plaint, is that on 09-10- 2022 the Defendant borrowed a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh Only) from the Plaintiff for his family necessities and executed a Promissory Note in favour of the Plaintiff at Sowdaradinne Village, Koilkuntla Mandal, Nandyal District, agreeing to repay the same with interest at 24% per annum. It is further pleaded that again on the very same day, i.e., 09-10-2022, the Defendant borrowed another sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh Only) and executed a second Promissory

Note on similar terms. It is further averred that on the same day the Defendant borrowed a sum of Rs.70,000/- (Rupees Seventy Thousand Only) and executed a third Promissory Note agreeing to repay the same with interest at 24% per annum.

03.According to the Plaintiff, despite repeated oral demands, the

Defendant failed to discharge the amounts due under the three Promissory Notes.

It is further pleaded that on 01-11-2024 the Plaintiff caused a Legal Notice to be issued to the Defendant through Counsel, but the Defendant refused to receive the same and failed to repay the Suit debt. Hence, the present Suit has been instituted for realization of the amounts due under the three Promissory Notes.

04.It is also pleaded that both the Plaintiff and the Defendant are residents of villages within Koilkuntla Mandal, Nandyal District, which falls within the territorial jurisdiction of this Court, and therefore this Court has jurisdiction to entertain and try the Suit.

05.Summons were issued to the Defendant. The Defendant failed to appear and contest the matter. Consequently, the Defendant was set exparte.

O.S.No.12 of 2025 - 3 - Civil Judge Court [J.D], KKL.

06.During Trial, the Plaintiff examined himself as PW-1 and filed his Chief-

Examination Affidavit reiterating the Plaint averments.

07.On behalf of the Plaintiff, the following documents were marked: Ex.A1 is the Original Promissory Note, Dated 09-10-2022 for Rs.1,00,000/-. Ex.A2 is the 2nd Original Promissory Note, Dated 09-10-2022 for Rs.1,00,000/-, Ex.A3 is the

Original 3rd Promissory Note, Dated 09-10-2022 for Rs.70,000/-, Ex.A4 is the Office

Copy of Legal Notice, Dated 01-11-2024, Ex.A5 is the Postal Receipt, Dated 01-11- 2024, and Ex.A6 is the Returned Postal Cover, Dated 04-11-2024.

08.The Cross-Examination of PW-1 was recorded as Nil in view of the

Defendant being set exparte. No oral or documentary evidence was adduced on behalf of the Defendant.

09.The following Points arise for consideration:

1.Whether the Plaintiff has proved that the Defendant borrowed the Suit amounts and executed Ex.A1 to Ex.A3?

2.Whether the Plaintiff is entitled to recover the Suit amount with interest?

3.To what relief?

Point No.1:

10.PW-1 has categorically deposed that the Defendant borrowed

Rs.1,00,000/-, Rs.1,00,000/- and Rs.70,000/- respectively on 09-10-2022 and executed Ex.A1 to Ex.A3 in his favour. The Original Promissory Notes have been produced before this Court.

11.Once execution of the Promissory Notes is proved, a presumption under Section 118(a) of the Negotiable Instruments Act arises that the instruments were executed for consideration.

O.S.No.12 of 2025 - 4 - Civil Judge Court [J.D], KKL.

12.In the present case, the Defendant remained exparte and failed to rebut the statutory presumption either by Cross-examining PW-1 or by adducing independent evidence. The oral testimony of PW-1 remains unchallenged and stands corroborated by Ex.A1 to Ex.A3.

13.Further, Ex.A4 to Ex.A6 establish that a Legal Notice was issued to the

Defendant and the same was refused. Refusal of Notice amounts to deemed service.

14.In the absence of any rebuttal evidence, this Court has no reason to disbelieve the case of the Plaintiff.

Accordingly, Point No.1 is answered in favour of the Plaintiff.

Point No.2:

15.Having held that the Defendant executed Ex.A1 to Ex.A3 and failed to discharge the amounts due thereunder, the Plaintiff is entitled to recover the

principal amounts covered under the three Promissory Notes.

16.Though the Promissory Notes stipulate interest at 24% per annum, it is well settled that under Section 34 of CPC, the Court has discretion to award reasonable interest.

17.Considering the nature of the transaction and the circumstances of the case, this Court is of the view that awarding interest at 6% per annum from the date of Suit till realization would meet the ends of justice.

Point No.2 is answered accordingly.

Point No.3 :- 18.In the result, the Suit is Decreed with costs in favour of the Plaintiff and against the Defendant, directing the Defendant to pay the Plaintiff, a sum of

Rs.1,51,000/- + Rs.1,51,000/- + Rs.1,05,700/-, a totaling Rs.4,07,700/- [Rupees

O.S.No.12 of 2025 - 5 - Civil Judge Court [J.D], KKL.

Four Lakhs Seven Thousand Seven Hundred only] with future interest at 6 percent per annum on the principal amount ofRs.1,00,000/- + Rs.1,00,000/- + Rs.70,000/-, a totaling Rs.2,70,000/- [Rupees Two Lakhs Seventy Thousand only] from the date of filing of the Suit till the date of the realization.

Typed to my dictation by the Stenographer Grade-III directly on System, corrected and pronounced by me in open Court on this the 20 th day of February, 2026.

CIVIL JUDGE [JUNIOR DIVISION], BANAGANAPALLE,

CAMP AT CIVIL JUDGE COURT [JUNIOR DIVISION], KOILAKUNTLA.

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

WITNESSES EXAMINED ON BEHALF OF THE PLAINTIFF

PW1 : Koppera Prasad. [Plaintiff]

EXHIBITS MARKED ON BEHALF OF THE PLAINTIFF

Ex.A1 : Original Suit Promissory Note, Dt.09-10-2022, for Rs.1,00,000/-.

Ex.A2 : 2nd Original Suit Promissory Note, Dt.09-10-2022, for Rs.1,00,000/-.

Ex.A3 : 3rd Original Suit Promissory Note, Dt.09-10-2022, for Rs.70,000/-.

Ex.A4 : Office Copy of Legal Notice, Dated 01-11-2024.

Ex.A5 : Postal Receipt, Dated 01-11-2024.

Ex.A6 : Returned Postal Cover, Dated 04-11-2024.

WITNESSES EXAMINED ON BEHALF OF THE DEFENDANT

Exparte.

EXHIBITS MARKED ON BEHALF OF THE DEFENDANT

NIL.

CIVIL JUDGE [JR. DIVISION], BANAGANAPALLE,

CAMP AT CIVIL JUDGE COURT [JR. DIVISION], KOILAKUNTLA.

O.S.No.12 of 2025 - 6 - Civil Judge Court [J.D], KKL.

Fair Judgment

O.S.No.12 of 2025

Dt. 20-02-2026

Part – I

O.S. No.12 of 2025 Civil Judge Court [J.D], KKL.

IN THE COURT OF THE CIVIL JUDGE [JUNIOR DIVISION]:: KOILAKUNTLA

Present :- Ms. S.Prathima

Civil Judge (Junior Division), Banaganapalle.

Camp at Civil Judge’s Court [Junior Division], Koilakuntla

Dated Friday, the 20 th day of February, 2026

ORIGINAL SUIT No. 12 of 2025

Between:

Koppera Prasad, Son of Koppera Esaku, Aged about 37 years, Hindu, Business,

Resident of H.No.1-1, Sowdaradinne Village, Koilakuntla Mandal, Nandyal District.

… PLAINTIFF

And :

Ganamaddula Prathap, Son of G.Obulesu, Aged about 30 years, Hindu, Business,

Resident of Pedda Kopperla Village, Koilakuntla Mandal, Nandyal District.

… DEFENDANT

*** * * * ***

This Suit is filed by the Plaintiff for recovery of the Suit Promissory

Notes debt of Rs.1,51,000/- + Rs.1,51,000/- + Rs.1,05,700/-, a totaling

Defendant in his favour, agreeing to repay the same with interest at 24%, 24% and at 24% Per Annum and for subsequent interest and costs.

Plaint presented on 25-11-2024 and numbered on 03-01-2025.

Suit is valued at Rs.1,51,000/- + Rs.1,51,000/- + Rs.1,05,700/-, a totaling Rs.4,07,700/- and a Court Fee of Rs.4,026/- + Rs.4,026/- + Rs.3,526/-, a totaling Rs.11,578/- is paid under Section 20 of A.P. Court Fee and Suits Valuation

Act.

O.S. No.12 of 2025 Civil Judge Court [J.D], KKL.

Cause of action arose on 09-10-2022 at Sowdaradinne Village, Koilakuntla

Mandal, Nandyal District, when the Defendant had executed three Suit Promissory

Note in favour of the Plaintiff for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- + Rs.1,00,000/- +

Rs.70,000/-, a totaling Rs.2,70,000/- /- and on all dates of demands made by the

Plaintiff to the Defendant to discharge the Suit Promissory Notes, which is within the jurisdiction of this Court.

This Suit is coming on 30-01-2026 for Hearing before this Court in the presence of Sri G.L.Narasimhudu and Sri D.Sreenivasulu, Advocates for the

Plaintiff, and the Defendant has been called absent and set ex-parte, and upon hearing the Plaintiff and having stood over for consideration till this day, this Court doth order and Decree as follows:

1) That the Defendant is hereby directed to pay the Plaintiff, a sum of

Rs.1,51,000/- + Rs.1,51,000/- + Rs.1,05,700/-, a totaling Rs.4,07,700/-

[Rupees Four Lakhs Seven Thousand Seven Hundred only] with future

interest at 6 percent per annum on the principal amount of Rs.1,00,000/- +

Rs.1,00,000/- + Rs.70,000/-, a totaling Rs.2,70,000/- [Rupees Two Lakhs

Seventy Thousand only] from the date of filing of the Suit till the date of

the realization ; and

2) That the Defendant do also pay to the Plaintiff the sum of Rs.18,641/- towards costs of the Suit.

Given under my hand and the seal of the Court on this the 20 th day of February, 2026.

CIVIL JUDGE [JUNIOR DIVISION], BANAGANAPALLE,

CAMP AT CIVIL JUDGE COURT [JUNIOR DIVISION], KOILAKUNTLA.

O.S. No.12 of 2025 Civil Judge Court [J.D], KKL.

STATEMENT OF COSTS

Particulars For the Plaintiff [Rs.] For the Defendant. [ Rs.]

Stamp for Plaint 11,578-00 -

Vakalath2-00-

Advocate’s Fee6,966-00-

Service of Process75-00-

Writing Charges20-00-

Total Rs. 18,641-00 -

CIVIL JUDGE [JUNIOR DIVISION], BANAGANAPALLE,

CAMP AT CIVIL JUDGE COURT [JUNIOR DIVISION], KOILAKUNTLA.

O.S. No.12 of 2025 Civil Judge Court [J.D], KKL.

D E C R E E

O.S.No.12 of 2025

Dt. 20-02-2026

Part – I

O.S. No.12 of 2025 Civil Judge Court [J.D], KKL.

OS/71/2025

M/S Andhra Pragathi Grameena Bank, Koilakuntla vs Y.Thimmaiah and G.Eswar Reddy

20 Feb 2026

O.S.No.71 of 2025 1 Civil Judge Court, KKL

IN THE COURT OF THE CIVIL JUDGE [JUNIOR DIVISION]::

KOILAKUNTLA

Present :- Ms. S.Prathima

Civil Judge (Junior Division), Banaganapalle.

Camp at Civil Judge’s Court [Junior Division], Koilakuntla

Dated Friday, the 20 th day of February, 2026

APKU130005752025 ORIGINAL SUIT No. 71 of 2025

Between:

Andhra Pragathi Grameena Bank, previously called as Rayalaseema Grameena

Bank, a body constituted under the Regional Rural Banks Act, 1976 carrying on

Banking Business having its Head Office at Kadapa and one among its Branches at

Koilakuntla, Kurnool District, Represented by its Chief Manager, Koilakuntla in view of merging of Anantha Grameena Bank, Rayalaseema Grameena Bank and

Pinakini Grameena Bank and amalgamated into single Regional Rural Bank called as “Andhra Pragathi Grameena Bank” as per Notification of Government of India,

Ministry of Finance Department of Economic Affairs, Banking Division, New Delhi,

Dated 01-06-2006 and one of its Branch at Koilakuntla Town and Mandal,

Represented by its Branch Manager.

… PLAINTIFF And :

1. Yanakandla Thimmaiah, Aged about 50 years, Son of Chinna Maddilety,

Hindu, Agriculturist.

2. Gaddam Eswara Reddy, Aged about 51 years, Son of Nagi Reddy, Hindu.

Both are residents of Akumalla Village, Sanjamala Mandal, Nandyal District.

… DEFENDANTS

*** * * * ***

O.S.No.71 of 2025 2 Civil Judge Court, KKL

This Suit was coming before this Court on 30-01-2026 for hearing in the presence of Sri G.C.Thirupathaiah, Advocate for the Plaintiff, and of

Sri G.L.Narasimhudu and Sri D.Sreenivasulu, Advocates for the Defendants are having been called absent and set ex-parte as no Written Statement filed within stipulated time, and upon hearing Counsel for the Plaintiff; and having stood over for consideration till this day, this Court delivered the following :-

J U D G M E N T

01.This Suit is filed by the Plaintiff’s Bank against the Defendants, for recovery of a sum of Rs.3,17,120/- [Rupees Three Lakhs Seventeen Thousand

One Hundred and Twenty only] being the Principal, Interest and other charges due under the Agricultural Credit Loan, Dated 21-03-2019, an Agreement was executed by the Defendant No.1 as a Borrower and the Defendant No.2 stood as a

Guarantor to the said Loan amount in favour of the Plaintiff’s Bank for Rs.1,43,000/- [Rupees One Lakh Forty Three Thousand only] with interest and for costs of the

Suit.

02. The averments in the Plaint, in brief, are as follows :-

That the Defendant No.1 sought for financial assistance for the purpose of Agricultural Credit Loan on 21-03-2019, and the loan of Rs.1,43,000/- was sanctioned, and on the same day, the Defendant No.2 stood as a Guarantor for the said Loan and both Defendants 1 & 2 executed an agreement in favour of the Plaintiff Bank. As per the terms, the Defendant No.1 agreed to repay the loan amount of Rs.1,43,000/- with interest at 7% Per Annum. Thereafter, the

Defendants did not pay any amount to the Plaintiff Bank. Hence, the Suit.

03.Thought the Defendants engaged Counsel, did not file their Written

Statement within stipulated time and hence they were set ex-parte.

O.S.No.71 of 2025 3 Civil Judge Court, KKL

04.During the Course of Trial, the Branch Manager of the Plaintiff’s bank filed his Chief Examination Affidavit and was examined as PW1. Exhibit A1 to A6 were marked .

05.Heard the Counsel for the Plaintiff.

06.Now the Point for consideration is that the Plaintiff’s bank is

entitled the decree against the Defendants to recovery loan debt as prayed

for?

07.The Counsel for the Plaintiff advanced his arguments in line with the

Plaint Pleadings and its supporting documents and contended that the first

Defendant is the Principal borrower who availed the loan from the bank and second

Defendant is the Guarantor. The Defendants failed to repay the loan amount as agreed by them at the time of availing the loan and hence the Suit is file. The

Counsel for the Plaintiff contended that, in order to prove the case, the Plaintiff

Bank adduced both oral and documentary evidence, and the Defendants did not challenge the evidence of the Plaintiff and prayed this Court to pass decree in favour of the Plaintiff Bank.

08.This Court perused the Plaint, Pleadings, Exhibits, Deposition of PW1 and other relevant records available on file.

09.On behalf of the Plaintiff bank, its Branch Manager was examined as

PW1 and through PW1, Exhibits A1 to A6 were marked. Exhibit A1 is the

Agreement executed by the 1st Defendant in favour of the Plaintiff Bank, Dt.21-03- 2019. Ex.A2 is the Guarantee Agreement executed by the 2nd Defendant in favour of the Plaintiff Bank, Dt.21-03-2019. Ex.A3 is the Acknowledgment, Dt.19-03-2022.

O.S.No.71 of 2025 4 Civil Judge Court, KKL

Ex.A4 is the Office Copy of Legal Notice, Dated 05-03-2025, Ex.A5 is the Served

Postal Acknowledgment and Ex.A6 is the Ledger Extract of the Loan Account,

Dt.04-03-2025.

10.Though the Defendants had knowledge about the Suit filed by the

Plaintiff bank, the Defendants did not choose to contest the case and the evidence of PW1 is unchallenged as contented by the Plaintiff’s Counsel. The Plaintiff Bank adduced both oral and documentary evidence to prove its case.

11.For the reason stated above, this Court is of the considered view that the Plaintiff proved its case and Plaintiff Bank is entitled to the Decree against the

Defendants to recover the loan debt as prayed in the Suit.

12. In the result, the Suit is decreed with costs in favour of the Plaintiff’s

Bank and against the Defendants. The Plaintiff’s Bank is hereby directed to recover an amount of Rs.3,17,120/- [Rupees Three Lakhs Seventeen Thousand

One Hundred and Twenty only] with future interest at 6 [Six] percent per annum on the principal sum of Rs.1,43,000/- [Rupees One Lakh Forty Three Thousand only] from the date of filing of the Suit till the date of realization from the Defendants jointly and personally.

Typed to my dictation by the Stenographer Grade-iii, corrected and

pronounced by me in open Court on this the 20 th day of February, 2026.

CIVIL JUDGE [JUNIOR DIVISION], BANAGANAPALLE,

CAMP AT CIVIL JUDGE COURT [JUNIOR DIVISION], KOILAKUNTLA.

O.S.No.71 of 2025 5 Civil Judge Court, KKL

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

WITNESSES EXAMINED ON BEHALF OF THE PLAINTIFF

P.W.1 : M.Raghavendra [Branch Manager].

EXHIBITS MARKED ON BEHALF OF THE PLAINTIFF

Ex.A1 : Agreement executed by the 1st Defendant in favour of the Plaintiff Bank,

Dt.21-03-2019.

Ex.A2 : Guarantee Agreement executed by the 2nd Defendant in favour of the

Plaintiff Bank, Dt.21-03-2019.

Ex.A3 : Acknowledgment, Dt.19-03-2022.

Ex.A4 : Office Copy of Legal Notice, Dated 05-03-2025.

Ex.A5 : Served Postal Acknowledgment.

Ex.A6 : Ledger Extract of the Loan Account, Dt.04-03-2025.

WITNESSES EXAMINED ON BEHALF OF THE DEFENDANTS

None. [Exparte]

EXHIBITS MARKED ON BEHALF OF THE DEFENDANTS

NIL.

Civil Judge [J.D.], Banaganapalle.

Camp at Civil Judge’s Court [J.D], Koilakuntla.

O.S.No.71 of 2025 6 Civil Judge Court, KKL

Fair Judgment

O.S.No.71 of 2025

Dt. 20-02-2026

O.S.No.71 of 2025 7 Civil Judge Court, BPL

IN THE COURT OF THE CIVIL JUDGE [JUNIOR DIVISION]:: KOILAKUNTLA

Present :- Ms. S.Prathima

Civil Judge (Junior Division), Banaganapalle.

Camp at Civil Judge’s Court [Junior Division], Koilakuntla

Dated Friday, the 20 th day of February, 2026

ORIGINAL SUIT No. 71 of 2025

Between:

Andhra Pragathi Grameena Bank, previously called as Rayalaseema Grameena

Bank, a body constituted under the Regional Rural Banks Act, 1976 carrying on

Banking Business having its Head Office at Kadapa and one among its Branches at

Koilakuntla, Kurnool District, Represented by its Chief Manager, Koilakuntla in view of merging of Anantha Grameena Bank, Rayalaseema Grameena Bank and

Pinakini Grameena Bank and amalgamated into single Regional Rural Bank called as “Andhra Pragathi Grameena Bank” as per Notification of Government of India,

Ministry of Finance Department of Economic Affairs, Banking Division, New Delhi,

Dated 01-06-2006 and one of its Branch at Koilakuntla Town and Mandal,

Represented by its Branch Manager.

… PLAINTIFF

And :

1. Yanakandla Thimmaiah, Aged about 50 years, Son of Chinna Maddilety,

Hindu, Agriculturist.

2.Gaddam Eswara Reddy, Aged about 51 years, Son of Nagi Reddy, Hindu.

Both are residents of Akumalla Village, Sanjamala Mandal, Nandyal District.

… DEFENDANTS

*** * * * ***

O.S.No.71 of 2025 8 Civil Judge Court, BPL

This Suit is filed by the Plaintiff’s Bank against the Defendants, for recovery of a sum of Rs.3,17,120/- [Rupees Three Lakhs Seventeen Thousand

Guarantor to the said Loan amount in favour of the Plaintiff’s Bank for Rs.1,43,000/- [Rupees One Lakh Forty Three Thousand only] with interest and for costs of the

Suit.

Plaint presented on 12-03-2025 and numbered on 24-03-2025.

Suit is valued at Rs.3,17,120/- and a Court Fee of Rs.5,626/- is paid under Section 20 of A.P. Court Fee and Suits Valuation Act.

Cause of action arose on 21-03-2019, when the Defendants executed an Agreement for Agricultural Credit Loan, in the name of the Plaintiff’s Bank and subsequently, the Plaintiff’s Bank made several demands and also Registered

Notices, the Defendants failed to repay the amount and on all other days when the

Plaintiff Bank made demands all are taken place at Koilakuntla Town and Mandal, within the Jurisdiction of the Court, within the Jurisdiction of the Court.

This Suit was coming before this Court on 30-01-2026 for hearing in the presence of Sri G.C.Thirupathaiah, Advocate for the Plaintiff, and of

O.S.No.71 of 2025 9 Civil Judge Court, BPL

1) That the Defendants No.1 and 2, jointly and personally liable to pay to the

Plaintiff’s Bank, a sum of Rs.3,17,120/- [Rupees Three Lakhs Seventeen

Thousand One Hundred and Twenty only] with future interest at 6 [Six]

percent per annum on the principal sum of Rs.1,43,000/- [Rupees One

Lakh Forty Three Thousand only] from the date of filing of the Suit till the

date of realization; and

2) That the Defendants No.1 and 2 do also pay to the Plaintiff’s Bank, the sum of Rs.11,450/- towards costs of the Suit.

Given under my hand and the seal of the Court on this the 20 th day of February, 2026.

CIVIL JUDGE [JUNIOR DIVISION], BANAGANAPALLE,

CAMP AT CIVIL JUDGE COURT [JUNIOR DIVISION], KOILAKUNTLA.

STATEMENT OF COSTS

Description For Plaintiff’s Bank For Defendants

Rs. Rs. Stamp for Plaint5,626-00-

Stamp for Power 2-00Nil (Ex-parte)

Advocate Fee 5,607-00-

Service of Process 115-00-

Typing Charges100-00-

Total Rs. 11,450-00 -

Civil Judge [J.D.], Banaganapalle.

Camp at Civil Judge’s Court [J.D], Koilakuntla.

O.S.No.71 of 2025 10 Civil Judge Court, BPL

D E C R E E

O.S. No.71 of 2025

Dt. 20-02-2026

OS/40/2019

MALE SUBBARAYUDU vs YEGGONI VENKATA SWAMY

20 Feb 2026

O.S.No.40 of 2019 - 1 - Civil Judge Court [J.D], KKL.

IN THE COURT OF THE CIVIL JUDGE [JUNIOR DIVISION]::

KOILAKUNTLA

Present :- Ms. S.Prathima

Civil Judge (Junior Division), Banaganapalle.

Camp at Civil Judge’s Court [Junior Division], Koilakuntla

Dated Friday, the 20 th day of February, 2026

ORIGINAL SUIT No. 40 of 2019 APKU130001372019

Between:

Male Subbarayudu, Son of Late M.Nadipenna, Aged 66 years, Hindu, Retired

Employee, Resident of H.No.17-97, L.M. Compound, Koilakuntla Village and

Mandal, Kurnool District [Now Nandyal District] … PLAINTIFF

And :

Yeggoni Venkata Swamy, Son of Y.Venkatanna, Aged 48 years, Hindu, Working as

Contract Basis Messenger at Andhra Bank, Ramapuram Village, Owk Mandal,

Kurnool District [Now Nandyal District].

… DEFENDANT

*** * * * ***

This Suit is coming on 30-01-2026 for the Defendant’s evidence before this Court in the presence of Sri S.Khaseem Saheb, Advocate for the Plaintiff, and of Sri R.Premanath Babu, Counsel for the Defendant, and upon hearing on both sides, and having stood over for consideration till this day, this Court delivered the following:-

J U D G M E N T

01.This Suit is filed by the Plaintiff for recovery of the Suit Promissory

Note debt of Rs.38,628/- [Rupees Thirty Eighty Thousand Six Hundred and Twenty

Eight only] being the Principal and Interest due on the Suit Promissory Note, Dated 20-06-2016 for Rs.23,000/- [Rupees Twenty Three Thousand only] executed by the

O.S.No.40 of 2019 - 2 - Civil Judge Court [J.D], KKL.

Defendant in his favour, agreeing to repay the same with interest at 24% Per

Annum and for subsequent interest and costs.

02.The Case of the Plaintiff, as pleaded in the Plaint, is that on 20-06- 2016 the Defendant borrowed an amount of Rs.23,000/- (Rupees Twenty Three

Thousand only) from the Plaintiff for his family necessities and on the same day executed a demand Promissory Note in favour of the Plaintiff at Koilkuntla agreeing to repay the same with interest at 24% per annum. It is further pleaded that despite repeated oral demands, the Defendant failed to discharge the Suit debt. Hence, the

Plaintiff was constrained to institute the present Suit.

03.The Defendant filed Written Statement contending that though he borrowed Rs.23,000/- on 20-06-2016 by executing the Promissory Note, he repaid substantial amounts towards the said debt. It is specifically pleaded that on 24-11- 2017 he paid Rs.10,000/- to the Bank Account of the Plaintiff, in April 2018 he paid

Rs.5,000/- in cash and on 23-10-2018 he paid Rs.7,000/- through the account of one M. Chandrudu. According to the Defendant, after deducting the said payments, he is liable to pay only Rs.1,000/- towards principal and interest thereon. The

Defendant therefore sought dismissal of the Suit in part.

04.Based on the Pleadings, this Court settled the following Issues:

1.Whether the Suit Promissory Note, Dated 20-06-2016 is true, valid and binding on the Defendant?

2.Whether the Plaintiff is entitled for the Suit claim as prayed for?

3.To what relief?

05.During Trial, the Plaintiff examined himself as PW-1 and marked Ex.A1 is the Original Promissory Note, Dated 20-06-2016 for Rs.23,000/-. In his Chief-

Examination, PW-1 reiterated the Plaint averments.

O.S.No.40 of 2019 - 3 - Civil Judge Court [J.D], KKL.

06.In Cross-Examination, PW-1 admitted that the Defendant transferred

Rs.10,000/- to his bank account on 24-11-2017. However, he stated that the said amount was towards a hand loan transaction and not towards discharge of Ex.A1.

He denied receipt of Rs.5,000/- in April 2018 and Rs.7,000/- on 23-10-2018 towards the Suit Promissory Note. He denied that after accounting Part-Payments only

Rs.1,000/- remained due.

07.The Plaintiff also examined PW-2, an Attestor to Ex.A1. PW-2 supported the Plaintiff’s Case regarding execution of the Promissory Note. In

Cross-Examination, nothing material was elicited to discredit his testimony. He denied the suggestion that no transaction took place or that he signed the

Promissory Note subsequently.

08.The Defendant did not adduce any oral evidence. Though he pleaded

Part-payments and stated that bank records would be produced, no documentary evidence was marked on his behalf. Ultimately, the Defendant remained absent and his evidence was treated as nil.

09.Now the Points for consideration are as follows:

Issue No.1:

10.The execution of Ex.A1 Promissory Note, Dated 20-06-2016 for

Rs.23,000/- is admitted by the Defendant in the Written Statement. Once execution of the Promissory Note is admitted, the presumption under Section 118(a) of the

Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 arises that the instrument was made for consideration.

11.The burden therefore shifts upon the Defendant to prove discharge or part satisfaction of the debt. Though the Defendant pleaded Part-Payments of

O.S.No.40 of 2019 - 4 - Civil Judge Court [J.D], KKL.

Rs.10,000/-, Rs.5,000/- and Rs.7,000/-, he has not entered the Witness Box to substantiate the same. No Bank Statement, Receipt, or any documentary proof has been produced to establish that the said payments were made towards Ex.A1.

12.It is well settled that mere Pleading without proof is not sufficient. When the Plaintiff proves execution of the Promissory Note and the statutory presumption operates in his favour, the Defendant must rebut the same by cogent evidence. In the absence of such evidence, the presumption remains unrebutted. Accordingly, this Court holds that Ex.A1 Promissory Note, Dated 20-06-2016 is true, valid and binding on the Defendant.

Issue No.1 is answered in favour of the Plaintiff.

Issue No.2:

13.The Plaintiff has proved execution of Ex.A1 and the Defendant has failed to establish repayment as pleaded. Therefore, the Plaintiff is entitled to recover the principal amount of Rs.23,000/-.

14.Though the Promissory Note stipulates interest at 24% per annum, the

Court has discretion under Section 34 CPC to award reasonable interest.

Considering the nature of the transaction and the amount involved, this Court is of the view that awarding interest at 6% per annum from the date of Suit till realization would meet the ends of justice.

Issue No.2 is answered partly in favour of the Plaintiff.

Issue No.3 :- 15.In the result, the Suit is Decreed with costs in favour of the Plaintiff and against the Defendant, directing the Defendant to pay the Plaintiff, a sum of

Rs.38,628/- [Rupees Thirty Eight Thousand Six Hundred and Twenty Eight only] with future interest at 6 percent per annum on the principal amount of Rs.23,000/-

O.S.No.40 of 2019 - 5 - Civil Judge Court [J.D], KKL.

[Rupees Twenty Three Thousand only] from the date of filing of the Suit till the date of the realization.

Typed to my dictation by the Stenographer Grade-III directly on System, corrected and pronounced by me in open Court on this the 20 th day of February, 2026.

CIVIL JUDGE [JUNIOR DIVISION], BANAGANAPALLE,

CAMP AT CIVIL JUDGE COURT [JUNIOR DIVISION], KOILAKUNTLA.

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

WITNESSES EXAMINED ON BEHALF OF THE PLAINTIFF

PW1 : M.Subbarayudu. [Plaintiff]

PW2 : G.Devadanam [Attestor]

EXHIBITS MARKED ON BEHALF OF THE PLAINTIFF

Ex.A1 : Original Promissory Note, Dated 20-06-2016 for Rs.23,000/-.

WITNESSES EXAMINED ON BEHALF OF THE DEFENDANT

None.

EXHIBITS MARKED ON BEHALF OF THE DEFENDANT

NIL.

CIVIL JUDGE [JR. DIVISION], BANAGANAPALLE,

CAMP AT CIVIL JUDGE COURT [JR. DIVISION], KOILAKUNTLA.

O.S.No.40 of 2019 - 6 - Civil Judge Court [J.D], KKL.

Fair Judgment

O.S.No.40 of 2019

Dt. 20-02-2026

Part – I

O.S. No.40 of 2019 Civil Judge Court [J.D], KKL.

IN THE COURT OF THE CIVIL JUDGE [JUNIOR DIVISION]:: KOILAKUNTLA

Present :- Ms. S.Prathima

Civil Judge (Junior Division), Banaganapalle.

Camp at Civil Judge’s Court [Junior Division], Koilakuntla

Dated Friday, the 20 th day of February, 2026

ORIGINAL SUIT No. 40 of 2019

Between: Male Subbarayudu, Son of Late M.Nadipenna, Aged 66 years, Hindu, Retired

Employee, Resident of H.No.17-97, L.M. Compound, Koilakuntla Village and

Mandal, Kurnool District [Now Nandyal District] … PLAINTIFF

And :

Yeggoni Venkata Swamy, Son of Y.Venkatanna, Aged 48 years, Hindu, Working as

Contract Basis Messenger at Andhra Bank, Ramapuram Village, Owk Mandal,

Kurnool District [Now Nandyal District].

… DEFENDANT

*** * * * ***

This Suit is filed by the Plaintiff for recovery of the Suit Promissory

Note debt of Rs.38,628/- [Rupees Thirty Eighty Thousand Six Hundred and Twenty

Eight only] being the Principal and Interest due on the Suit Promissory Note, Dated 20-06-2016 for Rs.23,000/- [Rupees Twenty Three Thousand only] executed by the

Defendant in his favour, agreeing to repay the same with interest at 24% Per

Annum and for subsequent interest and costs.

Plaint presented on 22-04-2019 and numbered on 23-04-2019.

Suit is valued at Rs.38,628/- and a Court Fee of Rs.2,086/- is paid under Section 20 of A.P. Court Fee and Suits Valuation Act.

Cause of action arose on 20-06-2016 at Koilakuntla Village and Mandal,

Kurnool District [Nandyal District], when the Defendant had executed Suit

O.S. No.40 of 2019 Civil Judge Court [J.D], KKL.

Promissory Note in favour of the Plaintiff for a sum of Rs.23,000/- and on all dates of demands made by the Plaintiff to the Defendant to discharge the Suit Promissory

Note, which is within the jurisdiction of this Court.

Decree as follows:

1) That the Defendant is hereby directed to pay the Plaintiff, a sum of

Rs.38,628/- [Rupees Thirty Eight Thousand Six Hundred and Twenty Eight

only] with future interest at 6 percent per annum on the principal amount

of Rs.23,000/- [Rupees Twenty Three Thousand only] from the date of filing

of the Suit till the date of the realization ; and

2) That the Defendant do also pay to the Plaintiff the sum of Rs.4,894/- towards costs of the Suit.

Given under my hand and the seal of the Court on this the 20 th day of February, 2026.

CIVIL JUDGE [JUNIOR DIVISION], BANAGANAPALLE,

CAMP AT CIVIL JUDGE COURT [JUNIOR DIVISION], KOILAKUNTLA.

STATEMENT OF COSTS

Particulars For the Plaintiff [Rs.] For the Defendant. [ Rs.]

Stamp for Plaint 2,086-00 - Vakalath2-00- Advocate’s Fee2,631-00- Service of Process75-00- Typing Charges100-00- Total Rs. 4,894-00 -

CIVIL JUDGE [JUNIOR DIVISION], BANAGANAPALLE,

CAMP AT CIVIL JUDGE COURT [JUNIOR DIVISION], KOILAKUNTLA.

OS/15/2020

Korrapati Venkata Ramanaiah vs Baki Chandra Sekhar Reddy

20 Feb 2026

O.S.No.15 of 2020 - 1 - Civil Judge Court [J.D], KKL.

IN THE COURT OF THE CIVIL JUDGE [JUNIOR DIVISION]::

KOILAKUNTLA

Present :- Ms. S.Prathima

Civil Judge (Junior Division), Banaganapalle.

Camp at Civil Judge’s Court [Junior Division], Koilakuntla

Dated Friday, the 20 th day of February, 2026

APKU130000812020 ORIGINAL SUIT No. 15 of 2020

Between:

Korrapati Venkata Ramanaiah, Son of Late K.Narayana, Aged 55 years, Hindu,

Business, Resident of H.No.19-130/552, Indiramma Colony, Koilakuntla Village and

Mandal, Kurnool District [Now Nandyal District] … PLAINTIFF

And :

Baki Chandra Sekhar Reddy, Son of B.Sura Reddy, Aged 30 years, Hindu,

Working as Junior Assistant in SRBC at Panyam Village and Mandal, Kurnool

District [Now Nandyal District] … DEFENDANT

*** * * * ***

This Suit is coming on 30-01-2026 for Hearing before this Court in the presence of Sri S.Khaseem Saheb, Advocate for the Plaintiff, and the Defendant has been called absent and set ex-parte, and upon hearing the Plaintiff and having stood over for consideration till this day, this Court delivered the following:-

J U D G M E N T

01.This Suit is filed by the Plaintiff for recovery of the Suit Promissory

Note debt of Rs.2,80,000/- [Rupees Two Lakhs Eighty Thousand only] being the

Principal and Interest due on the Suit Promissory Note, Dated 03-06-2018 for

Rs.2,00,000/- [Rupees Two Lakhs only] executed by the Defendant in his favour, agreeing to repay the same with interest at 24% Per Annum and for subsequent

O.S.No.15 of 2020 - 2 - Civil Judge Court [J.D], KKL.

interest and costs.

02.The case of the Plaintiff, as pleaded in the Plaint, is that the Defendant, who is known to the Plaintiff, borrowed a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- on 03-06-2018 for his family necessities and executed a demand Promissory Note in favour of the

Plaintiff agreeing to repay the same on demand with interest at 24% per annum. It is further pleaded that despite several oral demands, the Defendant failed to discharge the debt. The Plaintiff thereafter got issued a Legal Notice, Dated 18-01- 2020 calling upon the Defendant to repay the Suit amount. Though the Defendant received the Notice, he neither replied nor paid the amount. Having no other alternative, the Plaintiff instituted the present Suit seeking recovery of the principal and interest accrued thereon.

03.Summons issued to the Defendant were duly served. However, the

Defendant failed to appear before the Court. Hence, the Defendant was set ex parte.

04.During the course of Trial, the Plaintiff examined himself as PW-1 and filed his Chief-Examination Affidavit reiterating the Plaint averments.

05.On behalf of the Plaintiff, the following documents were marked: Ex.A1 is the Original Suit Promissory Note, Dated 03-06-2018 executed by the Defendant for Rs.2,00,000/-. Ex.A2 is the Office copy of Legal Notice Dated 18-01-2020 and

Ex.A3 is the Postal receipt Dated 18-01-2020.

06.The Cross-Examination of PW-1 was recorded as nil as the Defendant remained exparte.

07.No oral or documentary evidence was adduced on behalf of the

Defendant.

O.S.No.15 of 2020 - 3 - Civil Judge Court [J.D], KKL.

08.The following Points arise for consideration:

1.Whether the Plaintiff has proved that the Defendant borrowed

Rs.2,00,000/- and executed Ex.A1 Promissory Note, Dated 03-06-2018?

2.Whether the Plaintiff is entitled to recover the Suit amount with interest?

3.To what relief?

Point No.1 :- 09.PW-1 has categorically deposed that the Defendant borrowed

Rs.2,00,000/- on 03-06-2018 and executed Ex.A1 in his favour agreeing to repay the same with interest at 24% per annum. The Original Promissory Note was produced before the Court and marked as Ex.A1.

10.Once execution of a Promissory Note is proved, Section 118(a) of the

Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 raises a statutory presumption that the instrument was made for consideration.

11.In Kundan Lal Rallaram v. Custodian, Evacuee Property (AIR 1961

SC 1316), the Hon’ble Supreme Court held that when execution of a negotiable

instrument is admitted or proved, the presumption under Section 118(a) operates in favour of the holder.

12.Further, in Bharat Barrel & Drum Mfg. Co. v. Amin Chand Pyarelal ((1999) 3 SCC 35), the Hon’ble Supreme Court held that the burden to rebut the presumption of consideration lies upon the Defendant and mere denial is not sufficient.

13.In the present case, the Defendant remained exparte and did not choose to contest the Suit. There is no rebuttal evidence on record to dislodge the statutory presumption under Section 118(a) of the Negotiable Instruments Act.

O.S.No.15 of 2020 - 4 - Civil Judge Court [J.D], KKL.

14.The oral testimony of PW-1 remains unchallenged and is fully corroborated by Ex.A1. Hence, this Court holds that the Plaintiff has successfully proved the execution of the Promissory Note and passing of consideration.

Accordingly, Point No.1 is answered in favour of the Plaintiff.

Point No.2 :- 15.Having held that the Defendant executed Ex.A1 and failed to repay the amount, the Plaintiff is entitled to recover the principal sum.

16.Though the Promissory Note stipulates interest at 24% per annum, it is well settled that under Section 34 of the Code of Civil Procedure, the Court has discretion to award reasonable interest.

17.In Central Bank of India v. Ravindra ((2002) 1 SCC 367), the Hon’ble

Supreme Court held that the Court must ensure that the rate of interest awarded is reasonable and just, depending upon the facts and circumstances of the case.

18.Considering the nature of the transaction and the fact that it is a private loan transaction, this Court is of the view that awarding interest at 6% per annum from the date of Suit till realization would meet the ends of justice.

19.Accordingly, the Plaintiff is entitled to recover Rs.2,80,000/- (being

principal and Pre-Suit interest as claimed) together with future interest at 6% per

annum from the date of Suit till realization.

Point No.2 is answered in favour of the Plaintiff.

20.In the result, the Suit is Decreed with costs in favour of the Plaintiff and against the Defendant, directing the Defendant to pay the Plaintiff, a sum of

Rs.2,80,000/- [Rupees Two Lakhs Eighty Thousand only] with future interest at 6 percent per annum on the principal amount of Rs.2,00,000/- [Rupees Two Lakhs

O.S.No.15 of 2020 - 5 - Civil Judge Court [J.D], KKL.

only] from the date of filing of the Suit till the date of the realization.

Typed to my dictation by the Stenographer Grade-III directly on System, corrected and pronounced by me in open Court on this the 20 th day of February, 2026.

CIVIL JUDGE [JUNIOR DIVISION], BANAGANAPALLE,

CAMP AT CIVIL JUDGE COURT [JUNIOR DIVISION], KOILAKUNTLA.

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

WITNESSES EXAMINED ON BEHALF OF THE PLAINTIFF

PW1 : K.Venkata Ramanaiah. [Plaintiff]

EXHIBITS MARKED ON BEHALF OF THE PLAINTIFF

Ex.A1 : Original Suit Promissory Note, Dt.03-06-2018, for Rs.2,00,000/-.

Ex.A2 : Office Copy of Legal Notice, Dated 18-01-2020.

Ex.A3 : Postal Receipt, Dated 18-01-2020.

WITNESSES EXAMINED ON BEHALF OF THE DEFENDANT

Exparte.

EXHIBITS MARKED ON BEHALF OF THE DEFENDANT

NIL.

CIVIL JUDGE [JR. DIVISION], BANAGANAPALLE,

CAMP AT CIVIL JUDGE COURT [JR. DIVISION], KOILAKUNTLA.

O.S.No.15 of 2020 - 6 - Civil Judge Court [J.D], KKL.

Fair Judgment

O.S.No.15 of 2020

Dt. 20-02-2026

Part – I

O.S. No.15 of 2020 Civil Judge Court [J.D], KKL.

IN THE COURT OF THE CIVIL JUDGE [JUNIOR DIVISION]:: KOILAKUNTLA

Present :- Ms. S.Prathima

Civil Judge (Junior Division), Banaganapalle.

Camp at Civil Judge’s Court [Junior Division], Koilakuntla

Dated Friday, the 20 th day of February, 2026

ORIGINAL SUIT No. 15 of 2020

Between:

Korrapati Venkata Ramanaiah, Son of Late K.Narayana, Aged 55 years, Hindu,

Business, Resident of H.No.19-130/552, Indiramma Colony, Koilakuntla Village and

Mandal, Kurnool District [Now Nandyal District] … PLAINTIFF

And :

Baki Chandra Sekhar Reddy, Son of B.Sura Reddy, Aged 30 years, Hindu,

Working as Junior Assistant in SRBC at Panyam Village and Mandal, Kurnool

District [Now Nandyal District] … DEFENDANT

*** * * * ***

This Suit is filed by the Plaintiff for recovery of the Suit Promissory

Note debt of Rs.2,80,000/- [Rupees Two Lakhs Eighty Thousand only] being the

Principal and Interest due on the Suit Promissory Note, Dated 03-06-2018 for

Rs.2,00,000/- [Rupees Two Lakhs only] executed by the Defendant in his favour, agreeing to repay the same with interest at 24% Per Annum and for subsequent interest and costs.

Plaint presented on 06-02-2020 and numbered on 12-02-2020.

Suit is valued at Rs.2,80,000/- and a Court Fee of Rs.5,226/- is paid under Section 20 of A.P. Court Fee and Suits Valuation Act.

Cause of action arose on 03-06-2018 at Koilakuntla Village and Mandal,

Kurnool District [Nandyal District], when the Defendant had executed Suit

O.S. No.15 of 2020 Civil Judge Court [J.D], KKL.

Promissory Note in favour of the Plaintiff for a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- and on all dates of demands made by the Plaintiff to the Defendant to discharge the Suit Promissory

Note, which is within the jurisdiction of this Court.

1) That the Defendant is hereby directed to pay the Plaintiff, a sum of

Rs.2,80,000/- [Rupees Two Lakhs Eighty Thousand only] with future

interest at 6 percent per annum on the principal amount of Rs.2,00,000/-

[Rupees Two Lakhs only] from the date of filing of the Suit till the date of

the realization ; and

2) That the Defendant do also pay to the Plaintiff the sum of Rs.10,578/- towards costs of the Suit.

Given under my hand and the seal of the Court on this the 20 th day of February, 2026.

CIVIL JUDGE [JUNIOR DIVISION], BANAGANAPALLE,

CAMP AT CIVIL JUDGE COURT [JUNIOR DIVISION], KOILAKUNTLA.

STATEMENT OF COSTS

Particulars For the Plaintiff [Rs.] For the Defendant. [ Rs.]

Stamp for Plaint 5,226-00 - Vakalath2-00- Advocate’s Fee5,050-00- Service of Process280-00- . Total Rs. 10,578-00 -

CIVIL JUDGE [JUNIOR DIVISION], BANAGANAPALLE,

CAMP AT CIVIL JUDGE COURT [JUNIOR DIVISION], KOILAKUNTLA.

OS/144/2024

K.Venkata Subbamma,K.Naga Bhaskar,K.Sreenivasulu vs K.Subramanyam

20 Feb 2026

O.S.No.144 of 2024 - 1 - Civil Judge Court [J.D], KKL.

IN THE COURT OF THE CIVIL JUDGE [JUNIOR DIVISION]::

KOILAKUNTLA

Present :- Ms. S.Prathima

Civil Judge (Junior Division), Banaganapalle.

Camp at Civil Judge’s Court [Junior Division], Koilakuntla

Dated Friday, the 20 th day of February, 2026

APKU130003322024 ORIGINAL SUIT No. 144 of 2024

Between:

1. Kanchana Venkata Subbamma, Wife of Kanchana Subramanyam, Aged about 52 years, Hindu, House wife.

2. Kanchana Naga Bhaskar, Son of Kanchana Subramanyam, Aged about 23 years, Hindu, Cultivation.

3. Kanchana Sreenivasulu, Son of Kanchana Subramanyam, Aged about 21 years, Hindu, Cultivation.

All are residing at D.No.26/954, Mittamadi Street, Proddatur Town and

Mandal, YSR District.

… PLAINTIFFS

And :

Kanchana Subramanyam, Son of Late Kanchana Muneiah, Aged about 61 years,

Hindu, Cultivation, Residing at D.No.10-53, Kotta Kottala, Veparala Village,

Mylavaram Mandal, YSR District.

… DEFENDANT

*** * * * ***

This Suit is coming on 23-01-2026 for the Plaintiff’s evidence before this Court in the presence of Sri K.Pavan Kumar, Sri M.Shukur and

Sri G.Hussainaiah, Advocate for the Plaintiffs, and the Defendant has been called absent and set ex-parte, and upon hearing the Plaintiff and having stood over for consideration till this day, this Court delivered the following:-

O.S.No.144 of 2024 - 2 - Civil Judge Court [J.D], KKL.

J U D G M E N T

01.This Suit is filed by the Plaintiffs seeking Partition and Separate

Possession of their shares in the Suit Schedule Property.

02. The brief averments of the Plaint are as follows: The Suit Schedule

Property, covered under Survey No.274 to an extent of Ac.0.85 cents situated at

Bodemmanuru Village fields, Uyyalavada Mandal, Nandyala District, is stated to be joint family property of the Plaintiffs and Defendant. Plaintiff No.1 is the wife of the

Defendant. Plaintiffs No.2 and 3 are their sons. Originally, the larger extent of

Ac.2.55 cents was purchased under Registered Sale Deed bearing document

No.1245 of 1959, Dated 30-07-1959 by Late Kanchana Basamma, mother of the

Defendant, acting as natural guardian of her minor sons. Subsequently, there was an oral partition among the family members, and in such partition an extent of

Ac.0.85 cents fell to the share of the Defendant. Thereafter, the Defendant got his name mutated in the revenue records.

03.It is the further case of the Plaintiffs that though they are residing separately due to matrimonial differences, the Suit Schedule Property continues to be joint family property and in joint possession. The Defendant allegedly postponed partition on one pretext or the other and attempted to alienate or mortgage the property to third parties. Hence, the Plaintiffs sought Partition into four equal shares and allotment of three such shares to the Plaintiffs.

04.Despite service of summons, the Defendant remained absent and was set exparte.

05. Based on the Pleadings, the following issues arise for consideration:

1.Whether the Plaintiffs are entitled for partition of the Suit

Schedule Property into four equal shares?

O.S.No.144 of 2024 - 3 - Civil Judge Court [J.D], KKL.

2.Whether the Plaintiffs are entitled for separate possession of their three shares?

3.To what relief?

06.In order to prove their Case, Plaintiff No.1 was examined as P.W.1 and her Chief-Examination Affidavit was filed. Ex.A1 to Ex.A4 were marked: Ex.A1 is the Certified Copy of Sale Deed document No.1245/1959 Dated 30-07-1959.

Ex.A2 is the Certified copy of Encumbrance Certificate, Ex.A3 is the Digital Copy of 1-B Namuna relating to the Suit Schedule Property. Ex.A4 is the Market Value

Certificate issued by Joint S.R.O., Koilkuntla.

07.The Defendant, having been set exparte, did not Cross-examine P.W.1.

No evidence was adduced on behalf of the Defendant.

Issue Nos.1 and 2:

08.The oral evidence of P.W.1 coupled with documentary evidence under

Ex.A1 to Ex.A4 establishes that the property Originally belonged to the family of the

Defendant and that in an earlier partition, Ac.0.85 cents fell to the share of the

Defendant.

09.There is no rebuttal evidence from the Defendant. In the absence of contest and in view of the unchallenged testimony of P.W.1, this Court finds that the

Suit Schedule Property is joint family property of the Plaintiffs and Defendant.

10.Plaintiff No.1 being the wife of the Defendant and Plaintiffs No.2 and 3 being his sons are entitled to claim partition. In a Hindu joint family governed by

Mitakshara law, the Coparceners are entitled to equal shares. Thus, the Suit

Schedule Property is liable to be divided into four equal shares.

O.S.No.144 of 2024 - 4 - Civil Judge Court [J.D], KKL.

11.Accordingly, the Plaintiffs together are entitled to three such equal shares and separate possession thereof.

These issues are answered in favour of the Plaintiffs.

Issue No.3:

12.In the result, the Suit is decreed with costs. A Preliminary Decree is hereby passed for Partition of the Suit Schedule Property into four equal shares.

The Plaintiffs are entitled to three equal shares in the Suit Schedule Property. The

Plaintiffs are at liberty to seek passing of final decree for division by metes and bounds and for separate possession of their shares.

Typed to my dictation by the Stenographer Grade-III directly on System, corrected and pronounced by me in open Court on this the 20 th day of February, 2026.

CIVIL JUDGE [JUNIOR DIVISION], BANAGANAPALLE,

CAMP AT CIVIL JUDGE COURT [JUNIOR DIVISION], KOILAKUNTLA.

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

WITNESSES EXAMINED ON BEHALF OF THE PLAINTIFFS

PW1 : K.Venkata Subbamma. [Plaintiff]

EXHIBITS MARKED ON BEHALF OF THE PLAINTIFFS

Ex.A1 : Certified Copy of Sale Deed Document No.1245/1959, Dated 30-07-1959.

Ex.A2 : Certified Copy of Encumbrance Certificate.

Ex.A3 : Digital Copy of 1-B Namuna relating to the Suit Schedule Property.

Ex.A4 : Market Value Certificate issued by Joint S.R.O., Koilkuntla.

WITNESSES EXAMINED ON BEHALF OF THE DEFENDANT

Exparte.

O.S.No.144 of 2024 - 5 - Civil Judge Court [J.D], KKL.

EXHIBITS MARKED ON BEHALF OF THE DEFENDANT

NIL.

CIVIL JUDGE [JR. DIVISION], BANAGANAPALLE,

CAMP AT CIVIL JUDGE COURT [JR. DIVISION], KOILAKUNTLA.

O.S.No.144 of 2024 - 6 - Civil Judge Court [J.D], KKL.

Fair Judgment

O.S.No.144 of 2024

Dt. 20-02-2026

Part – I

O.S. No.144 of 2024 Civil Judge Court [J.D], KKL.

IN THE COURT OF THE CIVIL JUDGE [JUNIOR DIVISION]:: KOILAKUNTLA

Present :- Ms. S.Prathima

Civil Judge (Junior Division), Banaganapalle.

Camp at Civil Judge’s Court [Junior Division], Koilakuntla

Dated Friday, the 20 th day of February, 2026

ORIGINAL SUIT No. 144 of 2024

Between:

1. Kanchana Venkata Subbamma, Wife of Kanchana Subramanyam, Aged about 52 years, Hindu, House wife.

2. Kanchana Naga Bhaskar, Son of Kanchana Subramanyam, Aged about 23 years, Hindu, Cultivation.

3. Kanchana Sreenivasulu, Son of Kanchana Subramanyam, Aged about 21 years, Hindu, Cultivation.

All are residing at D.No.26/954, Mittamadi Street, Proddatur Town and

Mandal, YSR District.

… PLAINTIFFS

And :

Kanchana Subramanyam, Son of Late Kanchana Muneiah, Aged about 61 years,

Hindu, Cultivation, Residing at D.No.10-53, Kotta Kottala, Veparala Village,

Mylavaram Mandal, YSR District.

… DEFENDANT

*** * * * ***

This Suit is filed by the Plaintiffs seeking Partition and Separate

Possession of their shares in the Suit Schedule Property.

Plaint presented and numbered on 02-09-2024.

Suit is valued at Rs.1,12,200/- and ¾ share of the Plaintiffs comes to

Rs.84,150/- and in which ¾ value value comes to Rs.63,112/- under Section 50[2] of APCF Act and the Court Fee of Rs.200/- is paid under Section under section 34[2] of A.P. Court Fee and Suits Valuation Act.

O.S. No.144 of 2024 Civil Judge Court [J.D], KKL.

The cause of action for the suit arose when the suit schedule property was purchased by the mother of the defendant and the mother-in-law of Plaintiff

No.1 through a Registered Sale Deed dated 30-07-1959, and when the brother of the defendant and the defendant partitioned the properties and jointly cultivated the schedule property. The cause of action further arose when the plaintiffs came to know that the defendant was trying to alienate or mortgage the property to a third party, which would cause loss to the plaintiffs. The plaint schedule property is situated at Bodemmanuru Village, Uyyalawada Mandal, which is within the jurisdiction of this Hon’ble Court.

This Suit is coming on 23-01-2026 for the Plaintiff’s evidence before this Court in the presence of Sri K.Pavan Kumar, Sri M.Shukur and

PRELIMINARY DECREE

01. That the Suit be and the same is hereby Preliminarily Decreed with Costs;

02. That the Suit Schedule Property is partition into four equal shares;

03. That the Plaintiffs No.1 to 3 are entitled to three [3] equal shares in the Suit Schedule Property;

04. That the Plaintiffs are at liberty to seek passing of Final Decree for division by metes and bounds and for separate possession of their shares.

O.S. No.144 of 2024 Civil Judge Court [J.D], KKL.

That the Defendant do also pay a sum of Rs.2,601/- being the 05. costs of the Suit to the Plaintiffs.

Given under my hand and seal of this Court, this the 20th day of February, 2026.

CIVIL JUDGE [JUNIOR DIVISION], BANAGANAPALLE,

CAMP AT CIVIL JUDGE COURT [JUNIOR DIVISION], KOILAKUNTLA.

STATEMENT OF COSTS

Particulars For the Plaintiffs [Rs.] For the Defendant. [ Rs.]

Stamp for Plaint 200-00- Vakalath2-00- Advocate’s Fee2,209-00- Service of Process70-00- Typing Charges100-00- Writing Charges20-00- Total Rs. 2,601-00 -

S C H E D U L E

Nandyala District, Koilakuntla Rural Sub District, Uyyalawada Mandal,

Bodemmanuru Village fields, Survey No.274, an extent of Ac.0-85 Cents with full extent.

CIVIL JUDGE [JUNIOR DIVISION], BANAGANAPALLE,

CAMP AT CIVIL JUDGE COURT [JUNIOR DIVISION], KOILAKUNTLA.

O.S. No.144 of 2024 Civil Judge Court [J.D], KKL.

D E C R E E

O.S.No.144 of 2024

Dt. 20-02-2026

Part – I

O.S. No.144 of 2024 Civil Judge Court [J.D], KKL.

Order Record 770 total

Case No.	Parties	Date	Type	Outcome
OS/27/2012	MAILA CHINNA MALLAIAH vs MEKALA RAJA GOPA L AND ANOTHER	14 May 2026	Copy of Judgment	—
OS/5/2021	Maalapale Mohana Reddy vs Vaidyam Rajagopalacharyulu	06 May 2026	Copy of Judgment	—
OS/107/2018	Parlapati Gangamma, W/o.Timmaraju vs Parlapati Suvarna, W/o.Maddaiah	06 May 2026	Copy of Judgment	—
OS/80/2018	Gali Rajagopal Reddy, S/o.Narayana Reddy vs Kambala Chandra Sekhar Reddy, s/o.Bala Venkata Reddy	05 May 2026	Copy of Judgment	—
OS/111/2015	Veerapuram Shakunthalamma vs Veerapuram Gnanamma	04 May 2026	Copy of Judgment	—
EP/37/2019	Sadula Rama Bhupal Reddy vs Katasani Venkateswara Reddy	30 Apr 2026	Copy of Order	—
OS/179/2024	Kottla Padmaja vs Sampangi Yalla Bhaskar	30 Apr 2026	Copy of Judgment	—
EP/10/2025	K.Chinnaiah, vs Hydersa Pedda Abbas Miah	29 Apr 2026	Copy of Judgment	—
EP/25/2016	V.Ckhinna Subba Reddy vs V.Venkata Narayana Reddy	29 Apr 2026	Copy of Order	—
EP/49/2015	Shaik Ameer Basha vs Jatka Khaja Hussain	29 Apr 2026	Copy of Judgment	—
OS/16/2026	Union Bank of India rep.by T.Nagendra Babu vs M.Gouri Kalingiri and Nasari Venkata Subbaiah	29 Apr 2026	Copy of Judgment	—
OS/124/2023	Andhra Pragathi Grameena Bank, rep.by its manager Sri Pasupulate sridhar Kumar vs Saddalakasi Viswanatha Reddy	29 Apr 2026	Copy of Judgment	—
OS/135/2019	Dande Harinath vs Telugu Govindu, Since died by his L.R.s, B. Rajeswari	29 Apr 2026	Copy of Judgment	—
OS/6/2024	Goppaji Satyamanna vs Vsyanumala Venkappa	28 Apr 2026	Copy of Judgment	—
OS/208/2022	Daruri Chandra Sekhar naidu vs Nalvagupalle Hussen Sabeh @ N.Chinna Hssen Saheb	27 Apr 2026	Copy of Judgment	—
CC/274/2019	The Sub-Inspector of police,Nandhivaram P.S. vs Veeramreddy Rami Reddy @ Ramudu	27 Apr 2026	Copy of Judgment	—
MC/5/2024	Ganganaboina Sowjanya vs Midathaboina Venkatesh	27 Apr 2026	Copy of Order	—
OS/115/2020	Sugaali Kalee Ramudu Naik @ Pithavath Ramudu Naik vs C.Veerappa died by Lrs.1. Chinthakayala Umadevi	21 Apr 2026	Copy of Judgment	—
OS/125/2019	Bontala Devendar Reddy vs Malluri Sivasankar Reddy	21 Apr 2026	Copy of Judgment	—
CC/61/2025	The SHO of Kolimigundla Ps vs Palukuri Surendra Babu	21 Apr 2026	Copy of Judgment	—
EP/11/2021	MUrali Shankarappa vs Kaluva Prasad Sharma	15 Apr 2026	Copy of Order	—
OS/135/2017	jersam Jayanna vs Dudekula Dasthagiri	15 Apr 2026	Copy of Judgment	—
OS/54/2021	Attar Vahida Begum vs Darga Mahaboob Basha	06 Apr 2026	Copy of Judgment	—
OS/90/2018	Chakali Lingamaiah, S/o.Chakali Pakkira vs Jaladurgam Altaf Hussain S/o.Jaladurgam Khasim Sa	06 Apr 2026	Copy of Judgment	—
OS/7/2020	Ummadi Koti Reddy vs M.Guru Prasad died by his LRS 1.M.Obulamma	02 Apr 2026	Copy of Judgment	—
OS/139/2018	Pandlapuram Naazia vs Shaik Pakkir Saheb	02 Apr 2026	Copy of Judgment	—
OS/218/2021	Shaik Mohammed Rafi vs Shaik Hussain Bee	02 Apr 2026	Copy of Judgment	—
OS/10/2021	Ambati Venkata Reddy vs Pasula Ravi Kumar Reddy	01 Apr 2026	Copy of Judgment	—
OS/80/2015	Muchalapuri Venkata Ramanaiah Alias Ramanaiah vs Manda Jaya Ramudu	01 Apr 2026	Copy of Judgment	—
CC/891/2023	The SHO of SEB, Banaganapalle Ps vs Kothapalli Venkatamma	31 Mar 2026	Copy of Judgment	—
OS/223/2023	Yeruva Rama Pulla Reddy vs Yeruva Prasad Reddy	30 Mar 2026	Copy of Judgment	—
CC/579/2018	Sub Inspector of Police, Nandivargam P.S. vs Munemmagari Prathap Reddy	30 Mar 2026	Copy of Judgment	—
CC/597/2023	The SHO of SEB Banaganapalle Ps vs Ediga Sivamma	30 Mar 2026	Copy of Judgment	—
CC/892/2023	The SHO of SEB, Banaganapalle Ps vs Desavath Venkatesh Naik	30 Mar 2026	Copy of Judgment	—
CC/104/2024	The SHo of SEB Banaganapalle Ps vs Koneti Srinivasulu @ Dubai Sreenu	25 Mar 2026	Copy of Judgment	—
CC/38/2024	The SHo of SEB, Banaganapalle Ps vs Yatagiri Ramanaiah	24 Mar 2026	Copy of Judgment	—
EP/35/2018	Kotnur JafferKathun vs Jaladurgam Shaik Ammer Basha	17 Mar 2026	Copy of Order	—
OS/28/2018	Aluvala Maddilety Swamy vs Yerasi Venkata Ramana Reddy	17 Mar 2026	Copy of Judgment	—
OS/30/2019	S.Vijaya Achari vs S.Yasmeen	17 Mar 2026	Copy of Judgment	—
OS/195/2019	Kopparapu Sreenivasulu vs Obulapu Anand Babu	17 Mar 2026	Copy of Judgment	—
CC/204/2023	The SHO Banaganapalle PS vs Gurram Ravi Chandra	17 Mar 2026	Copy of Judgment	—
OS/132/2022	Rangapuram Gana Madamma vs Etikala maddilety @ Gudisanna	16 Mar 2026	Copy of Judgment	—
OS/142/2025	Gandla Subba Raidu vs Dudekula Chinna Babaiah	16 Mar 2026	Copy of Judgment	—
OS/55/2024	Yamapalaku Venkata Narayana vs Sake Nagaraju	12 Mar 2026	Copy of Judgment	—
OS/119/2024	Nagiri Pavan vs Srinivasulu Since died by his LRs. Kokku Sumath	12 Mar 2026	Copy of Judgment	—
CC/42/2024	The SHO of SEB, Banaganapalle Ps vs Uppari Ramesh	12 Mar 2026	Copy of Judgment	—
CC/209/2022	SHO of Owk PS vs Yerukali Subbaiah	12 Mar 2026	Copy of Judgment	—
CC/362/2024	The SHIO of Kolimigundla Ps vs K.Prabhakaran	12 Mar 2026	Copy of Judgment	—
OS/26/2022	T Venkata Ramana @ Talanki Venkata Ramanaiah vs Poluka Venkata subba rao	11 Mar 2026	Copy of Judgment	—
OS/51/2024	Nakka Madhu Gopal vs Akkannagari Siva Krishna	11 Mar 2026	Copy of Judgment	—
OS/60/2018	K.Basavaraju died his Lr's K.Padmavathi, W/o.Late K.Basavaraju vs G. Satyam Yadav, S/o. G. Venkata Sivudu	11 Mar 2026	Copy of Judgment	—
OS/194/2025	Gaddam Thimma Reddy vs Uppuluru Pakkira Reddy alias Pakki Reddy,	11 Mar 2026	Copy of Judgment	—
CC/54/2024	The SHO of SEB, Banaganapale vs Dornipadu sivaiah	11 Mar 2026	Copy of Judgment	—
CC/55/2024	The SHo of SEB, Banaganapalle Ps vs Bannavath Devla Naik	11 Mar 2026	Copy of Judgment	—
CC/901/2022	The SHO owk PS vs Moode Anjaneya naik	11 Mar 2026	Copy of Judgment	—
OS/15/2023	Golla Sunkanna vs P,Pedda Ranganna	09 Mar 2026	Copy of Judgment	—
CC/36/2024	The SHO of SEB, Banaganapalle Ps vs Pothuraju Papanna	09 Mar 2026	Copy of Judgment	—
CC/102/2024	The SHO of SEB Banaganapalle PS vs Shaik Hasan	09 Mar 2026	Copy of Judgment	—
CC/108/2024	The SHo of SEB Banaganapalle Ps vs Pendla Sankaraiah Goud	09 Mar 2026	Copy of Judgment	—
CC/122/2024	The SHo of SEB Banaganapalle Ps vs Korra Lakshma Naik Lakshmann Naik	09 Mar 2026	Copy of Judgment	—
CC/192/2024	The SHO of SEB, Banaganapalle Ps vs Talari Akkamma	09 Mar 2026	Copy of Judgment	—
EP/30/2017	Vyaparla Chinna Subba Reddy vs Vyaparla Narayana Reddy	05 Mar 2026	Copy of Order	—
OS/33/2025	Gouru Parvathi vs Dasari Mariyamma	05 Mar 2026	Copy of Judgment	—
OS/89/2022	Nallagatala Vasundhara Devi vs Shaik Hussin Bee	05 Mar 2026	Copy of Judgment	—
CC/29/2024	The SHO of SEB, Banaganapalle vs Talari Nageswara Rao	05 Mar 2026	Copy of Judgment	—
CC/40/2024	The SHo of SEB, Banaganapalle vs Katravath Jaya Lakshmi Bai	05 Mar 2026	Copy of Judgment	—
CC/57/2024	The SHO of SEB, Banaganapalle Ps vs Mandal Venkata Ramana	05 Mar 2026	Copy of Judgment	—
CC/103/2024	The SHo of SEB Banaganapalle Ps vs Devarakonda Suresh	05 Mar 2026	Copy of Judgment	—
OS/117/2024	Terupeludinne Subbarayudu vs Gandham Hussaini	03 Mar 2026	Copy of Judgment	—
OS/140/2021	Bathula Varalakshmi @ VARALAKSHMI DEVI vs Dudekula Rahamthulla	03 Mar 2026	Copy of Judgment	—
CC/189/2024	The SHO of SEB, Banaganapalle Ps vs Manapati Naga Lakshmi	03 Mar 2026	Copy of Judgment	—
CC/852/2023	The SHO of SEB, Banaganapalle Ps vs Korra Ramesh Naik	03 Mar 2026	Copy of Judgment	—
CC/854/2023	The SHO of SEB, Banaganapalle Ps vs Pothuraju Nadipi Sunkanna	03 Mar 2026	Copy of Judgment	—
EP/16/2023	Shaik Hussain Vali vs Mali Ameer Basha	02 Mar 2026	Copy of Order	—
OS/47/2025	The Manager Canara Bank, Baanaganapalle vs M.Annes Fathima	02 Mar 2026	Copy of Judgment	—
OS/115/2023	Vankadara Suvartha vs Yadiki Sekhar	02 Mar 2026	Copy of Judgment	—
OS/166/2025	Vara Lakshmi Devi vs Dasari Lakshmi Maddaiah	02 Mar 2026	Copy of Judgment	—
CC/48/2024	The SHo of SEB, Banaganapalle Ps vs Shaik Khasim @ Bade Saheb @ S.Khasim	02 Mar 2026	Copy of Judgment	—
CC/261/2024	The SHo of SEB, Banaganapalle Ps vs Shiva	02 Mar 2026	Copy of Judgment	—
CC/756/2022	The SHO Banaganapalle PS vs Talari Ramulamma @ Talari Rakmulu	02 Mar 2026	Copy of Judgment	—
OS/12/2025	Koppera Prasad vs G.Prathap	20 Feb 2026	Copy of Judgment	—
OS/15/2020	Korrapati Venkata Ramanaiah vs Baki Chandra Sekhar Reddy	20 Feb 2026	Copy of Judgment	—
OS/40/2019	MALE SUBBARAYUDU vs YEGGONI VENKATA SWAMY	20 Feb 2026	Copy of Judgment	—
OS/71/2025	M/S Andhra Pragathi Grameena Bank, Koilakuntla vs Y.Thimmaiah and G.Eswar Reddy	20 Feb 2026	Copy of Judgment	—
OS/144/2024	K.Venkata Subbamma,K.Naga Bhaskar,K.Sreenivasulu vs K.Subramanyam	20 Feb 2026	Copy of Judgment	—
OS/153/2021	Yeddula Linga Reddy vs Ramapuram Mallikarjuna	20 Feb 2026	Copy of Judgment	—
EP/27/2015	U.Koti Reddy vs S.Karemulla	19 Feb 2026	Copy of Order	—
CC/58/2011	VADLA RAMA MUNAIAH vs MAJJIGA LAKSHMI NARAYANA REDDY AND ANOTHER	19 Feb 2026	Copy of Judgment	—
CC/100/2024	The SHo of SEB Banaganapalle PS vs Talari Ramanaiah	19 Feb 2026	Copy of Judgment	—
CC/770/2022	The SEB Banaganapalle vs Chowti Lakshmi Devi	19 Feb 2026	Copy of Judgment	—
CC/174/2021	The sub-inspector of police, Owk P.S vs Avulakkagtari Madhu Sudhakar	18 Feb 2026	Copy of Judgment	—
OS/176/2017	Dudekula Hussainamma vs Dudekula Kambakka	16 Feb 2026	Copy of Judgment	—
OS/152/2024	Union Bank of India, Koilakuntla. vs Boya Bala Ramudu and D.Sunitha	13 Feb 2026	Copy of Judgment	—
EP/9/2023	Obulareddygari Sridar Reddy vs Palle Rama Subba Reddy	12 Feb 2026	Copy of Judgment	—
OS/98/2018	Vadisela Sivanagi Reddy,S/O,NARASIMHA REDDY vs Kedem Rajesh Kumar, S/o. Ssekhar	12 Feb 2026	Copy of Judgment	—
OS/123/2017	Mallu Raja Sekhar Reddy vs Chudttupalle Venkata Ramireddy	12 Feb 2026	Copy of Judgment	—
CC/774/2022	The SEB Banaganapalle vs Kalingiri Sunkamma	12 Feb 2026	Copy of Judgment	—
EP/20/2022	Yerva Siva Nagi Reddy vs Chakram Venkateswara Raju @ C V Raju	11 Feb 2026	Copy of Order	—
EP/28/2023	Guduru Nageswara Redy vs Yaparla Renukanth Reddy	11 Feb 2026	Copy of Order	—
OS/125/2025	Guddeti Rama Krishna Reddy vs Uppari Surendra	11 Feb 2026	Copy of Judgment	—

Showing 100 of 770 orders — Log in to browse all pages.

Monthly Orders (Last 12 Months)

May 2026		5
Apr 2026		24
Mar 2026		51
Feb 2026		37
Jan 2026		86
Dec 2025		72
Nov 2025		76
Oct 2025		84
Sep 2025		76
Aug 2025		101
Jul 2025		117
Jun 2025		33

Frequently Asked Questions

How many cases has MS S.Prathima handled?

MS S.Prathima has handled 795 court orders since 2025 at Junior Civil Judge`s Court, Banaganapalli (Taluka). The average disposal rate is 62 orders per month.

What types of cases does MS S.Prathima hear?

Based on available records, MS S.Prathima primarily handles Civil matters (Original Suits, Execution Petitions) and Criminal matters (Criminal Cases) at Junior Civil Judge`s Court, Banaganapalli (Taluka).

Where is MS S.Prathima currently posted?

MS S.Prathima is posted as JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE at Junior Civil Judge`s Court, Banaganapalli (Taluka), Kurnool, Andhra Pradesh.

Are judgments by MS S.Prathima available online?

Yes. 10 judgments by MS S.Prathima are available on Legistro with full text, outcome, and sections cited.

How fast does MS S.Prathima dispose cases?

MS S.Prathima disposes approximately 62 cases per month, based on 795 orders handled over their tenure at Junior Civil Judge`s Court, Banaganapalli (Taluka).

Since when is MS S.Prathima serving?

MS S.Prathima has been serving at Junior Civil Judge`s Court, Banaganapalli (Taluka) since 2025. and is currently posted there.

Case Types

OS 60%

CC 35%

EP 4%

MC 1%

ELECOP 1%

DVC 0%

A 0%

STC 0%

Posting History

May 2025 — Present

JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE · 718 orders
May 2025 — Present

Junior Civil Judge · 77 orders

← View all judges at Junior Civil Judge`s Court, Banaganapalli (Taluka)