Sampath Challuri

Prl Junior Civil Judge

Siddipet, PDJ Court Complex · Siddipet · Telangana

SAMPATH CHALLURI, Prl Junior Civil Judge, is posted at Siddipet, PDJ Court Complex, Siddipet, Telangana, India. 75 court orders on record since 2017. 5 judgments with full text available. Primarily handles OS, CC cases.

Total Orders

Judgments

Orders/Month

Postings

Featured Judgments

OS/265/2018

A.P Grameena Vikas Bank Kukunoorpalli Branch vs Nanubala Narsimha Reddy

15 Mar 2019

IN THE COURT OF THE PRINCIPAL JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE

AT SIDDIPET

PRESENT: Sri. Sampath CH,

Prl. Junior Civil Judge,

Siddipet.

Friday, the 15th day of March, 2019.

O.S.NO. 265 of 2018

Between:

A.P. Grameena Vikas Bank, Kukunoorpally Branch Rep. by its Branch Manager, …PLAINTIFF

AND

Nanubala Narsimha Reddy. S/o. Ashi Reddy, age: 56 years, Occ: agriculture, R/o. Singaram village, Kondapak Mandal, Siddipet District.

…DEFENDANT

This suit is coming on 12-03-2019 before me for hearing in the presence of Sri. M. Rama Rao, counsel for the Plaintiff; the defendants were remained set ex-parte, this court delivered the following:

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

1.This is the suit for recovery of money an amount of Rs. 55,650/- (Rupees Fifty five thousand six hundred and fifty only).

2.The case of the plaintiff bank is that, the defendant obtained crop loan for an amount of Rs. 73,000/- but the plaintiff bank sanctioned by restricting an amount of Rs.

56,000/- on 06-01-2015 @ 14% p.a. The defendant executed fresh Hypothecation of

Agreement and availed the loan an amount of Rs. 50,000/- on 06-01-2015 under Account number 73044292319 and agreed to pay the said loan amount after harvesting the crop with interest or within 12 months from the date of loan.

3.The further case of the plaintiff is that the defendant failed to pay the loan amount, he got renewal the same on 30-09-2015 by availing Rs. 44,000/- and on 12-10-2015 by availing Rs. 12,000/-. Then after he failed to pay the amount as per his agreement inspite of several demands. As such the plaintiff bank issued legal notice to the defendant on 07-09-2017, the same is served on him on 14-09-2017 but no response from him. The defendant is due an amount of Rs. 55,650/- as on date 17-09-2018. Hence, this suit.

4.On receipt of notice the defendant appeared before this court and requested 3 months time for payment of loan amount by admitting the claim of plaintiff on 15-11-2018. Then after, on 15-02-2019 when the case was posted for appearance of defendant but he failed to appear before the court and no representation was made.

Hence, he made set ex-parte.

5.To support the case of plaintiff, Sri. D. Srinivasulu who is representative of plaintiff bank got himself examined as Pw-1 and filed chief examination affidavit.

Exhibit A1 to A8 documents were marked on behalf of the plaintiff. Ex.A-1 is the Loan application form Dated 03-01-2015. Ex.A-2 is the Hypothecation of Agreement Dated 06-01-2015. Ex.A-3 is the Original Revival letter Dated 03-01-2018. Ex.A-4 is Meeseva pahanies for fasli year 1424 (in total 18 numbers). Ex.A-5 is the office copy of legal notice Dated 07-09-2017, Ex.A-6 is postal receipt, Dated 07-09-2017, Ex.A-7 is original postal acknowledgment card. Ex.A-8 is Certified copies of statement of copy of accounts.

6. Heard the learned counsel for plaintiff.

7.Now the point to be determined is: Whether plaintiff is entitled for recovery of

Rs. 55,650/- (Rupees Fifty five thousand six hundred and fifty only) along with

interest from the defendants as prayed for ?

POINT:

8.In support of the plaintiff Bank contention P.W.1 examined by filing his chief affidavit and got marked Ex.A1 to A8, which are goes to show that the plaintiff Bank sanctioned crop loan as mentioned in the plaint. It is significant to note here that when the summons is received by the defendant, he appeared before the court on 15-11-2018 and admitted plaintiff claim, it is evident from the docket order of that day. The docket order on 15-11-2018 is as “Defendant present. He requested 3 months time to make payment. He admitted the claim of the plaintiff, call on 15-02-2019”. From this it is clear that the defendant is liable to pay the suit amount to the plaintiff Bank.

9.The unchallenged testimony of P.w.1 coupled with Ex.A-1 to Ex.A-8 also proved that the defendants availed the loan from the plaintiff Bank subsequently they became default in paying the loan amount. Therefore, the plaintiff Bank is entitled to recover the loan amount. Accordingly, the point is answered in favour of the plaintiff and against the defendant.

10.IN THE RESULT, the suit is decreed with costs against the defendant for recovery of an amount of Rs.55,650/- (Rupees Fifty five thousand six hundred and fifty only) and subsequent interest @ 12 % per annum from the date of suit till the date of decree and thereafter @ 6 % per annum till realization on the principal suit amount

Rs. 56,000/.

Typed to my Dictation by the Stenographer G-III, transcribed by her, corrected and

pronounced by me in open court on this the 15th day of March, 2019.

PRINCIPAL JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE,

SIDDIPET.

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

WITNESSES EXAMINED

For PLAINTIFF:For DEFENDANT:

P.W.1: D. Srinivasulu – None –

Documents marked on behalf of Plaintiff:

Ex.A-1 is the Loan application form Dated 03-01-2015.

Ex.A-2 is the Hypothecation of Agreement Dated 06-01-2015.

Ex.A-3 is the Original Revival letter Dated 03-01-2018.

Ex.A-4 is Meeseva pahanies for fasli year 1424 (in total 18 numbers).

Ex.A-5 is the office copy of legal notice Dated 07-09-2017,

Ex.A-6 is postal receipt, Dated 07-09-2017,

Ex.A-7 is original postal acknowledgment card.

Ex.A-8 is Certified copies of statement of copy of accounts.

Documents marked on behalf of Defendant: -NIL-

PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE,

SIDDIPET.

OS/243/2018

State Bank of India ADB, Siddipet Branch vs Mahadevoju Ramesh

15 Mar 2019

IN THE COURT OF THE PRINCIPAL JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE

AT SIDDIPET

PRESENT: Sri. Sampath CH,

Prl. Junior Civil Judge,

Siddipet.

Friday, the 15th day of March, 2019.

O.S.NO. 243 of 2018

Between:

State Bank of India, Siddipet Branch, Rep. by its Chief Manager, Smt. Kasubatla Lalitha …PLAINTIFF

AND

Mahadevoju Ramesh, S/o. Balaiah, age: major, Occ: Business, R/o. Vittalapur village, Chinnakodur Mandal, Siddipet District. …DEFENDANT

This suit is coming on 14-03-2019 before me for hearing in the presence of Sri. K. Shiva Charan, counsel for the Plaintiff; the defendants were remained set ex-parte, this court delivered the following:

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

1.This is the suit for recovery of money an amount of Rs. 63,946/- (Rupees Sixty three thousand nine hundred and forty six only).

2.The case of the plaintiff bank is that, the defendant approached plaintiff-bank for sanction and release of business. Accordingly, the plaintiff bank sanctioned an amount of

Rs. 60,000/- to the defendant and released under Account number 32924817051, the defendant agreed the terms and conditions as per sanction to repay the loan within 64 equal monthly installments from May, 2013 with the interest of 13.10% p.a. The defendant also executed Hypothecation Dated 23-02-2013 and also letter of agreement on the same day in favour of the plaintiff bank, the defendant failed to pay regular payment. As such on 15-02-2016 executed revival letter for the said loan even though he neglected to clear the dues inspite of repeated demands.

3.The further case of the plaintiff is that the defendant is liable to pay an amount of

Rs. Rs. 63,946/- (Rupees Sixty three thousand nine hundred and forty six only) with subsequent future interest as on 15-02-2016 and also the plaintiff bank is entitled for recovery the above said loan amount from the defendants together till the date of realization of the total amount. Hence, this suit.

4.On receipt of notice the defendant failed to appear appear before this court. As such, he was set ex-parte.

5.To support the case of plaintiff, Sri. B. Venkanna who is the representative of plaintiff bank got himself examined as Pw-1 and filed chief examination affidavit.

Exhibit A1 to A4 documents were marked on behalf of the plaintiff. Ex.A-1 is the

Original term loan and Hypothecation Agreement Dated 23-02-2013. Ex.A-2 is the

Original Letter of arrangement dated 23-02-2013. Ex.A-3 is the Original Revival letter

Dated 15-02-2016. Ex.A-4 is the Original statement of account copy dated 25-07-2018.

6. Heard the learned counsel for plaintiff.

7.Now the point to be determined is: Whether plaintiff is entitled for recovery of

Rs. 63,946/- (Rupees Sixty three thousand nine hundred and forty six only). Along with interest from the defendants as prayed for ?

8.POINT: Theevidence of P.w.1 discloses that, he is the Bank Manager of Plaintiff

Bank Siddipet Branch. It is the evidence of P.w.1 is that, Bank sanctioned the business loan an amount of Rs. 60,000/- was sanctioned to the defendants. The defendants executed Hypothecation of Agreement and availed the loan amount through the Account

No. 32924817051 but the defendant failed to repay the loan amount as per installments.

Therefore, he prayed to decree the suit for an amount of Rs. 63,946/- (Rupees Sixty three thousand nine hundred and forty six only) along with interest.

9.In support of his contention he got marked Ex.A1 to A4, which are goes to show that the plaintiff Bank sanctioned business loan of Rs.60,000/- to the defendants under

Ex.A-1 and Ex.A-2, the defendants also executed Ex.A.3, From Ex.A-4 it is evident about transaction of defendants loan account.

10.The unchallenged testimony of P.w.1 coupled with Ex.A-1 to Ex.A-4 proved that the defendants availed the loan from the plaintiff Bank subsequently they became default in paying the loan amount. Therefore, the plaintiff Bank is entitled to recover the loan amount. Accordingly, the point is answered in favour of the plaintiff and against the defendant.

11.IN THE RESULT, the suit is decreed with costs against the defendant for recovery of an amount of Rs. 63,946/- (Rupees Sixty three thousand nine hundred and forty six only) and subsequent interest @ 12 % per annum from the date of suit till the date of decree and thereafter @ 6 % per annum till realization on the principal suit amount Rs. 60,000/-.

Typed to my Dictation by the Stenographer G-III, transcribed by her, corrected and

pronounced by me in open court on this the 15th day of March, 2019.

PRINCIPAL JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE,

SIDDIPET.

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

WITNESSES EXAMINED

For PLAINTIFF:For DEFENDANT:

P.W.1: B. Venkanna.– None –

Documents marked on behalf of Plaintiff:

Ex.A-1 is the Original term loan and Hypothecation Agreement Dated 23-02-2013.

Ex.A-2 is the Original Letter of arrangement dated 23-02-2013.

Ex.A-3 is the Original Revival letter Dated 15-02-2016.

Ex.A-4 is the Original statement of account copy dated 25-07-2018.

Documents marked on behalf of Defendant: -NIL-

PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE,

SIDDIPET.

OS/244/2018

State Bank of India - ADB Siddipet Branch vs Pedishetti Yadagiri

15 Mar 2019

IN THE COURT OF THE PRINCIPAL JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE

AT SIDDIPET

PRESENT: Sri. Sampath CH,

Prl. Junior Civil Judge,

Siddipet.

Friday, the 15th day of March, 2019.

O.S.NO. 244 of 2018

Between:

State Bank of India, Siddipet Branch, Rep. by its Chief Manager, Smt. Kasubatla Lalitha …PLAINTIFF

AND

Pedishetti Yadagiri, S/o. Kanakaiah, age: major, Occ: Business, R/o. Akkenapally village, Nangunoor Mandal, Siddipet District. …DEFENDANTS

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

1.This is the suit for recovery of money an amount of Rs. 69,828/-. (Rupees Sixty nine thousand eight hundred and twenty eight only).

2.The case of the plaintiff bank is that, the defendant approached plaintiff-bank for sanction and release of business. Accordingly, the plaintiff bank sanctioned an amount of

Rs. 65,000/- to the defendant and released under Account number 32832710621, the defendant agreed the terms and conditions as per sanction to repay the loan within 64 equal monthly installments from May, 2013 with the interest of 12.45% p.a. The defendant also executed Hypothecation Dated 18-02-2013 and also letter of agreement on the same day in favour of the plaintiff bank, the defendant failed to pay regular payment. As such on 02-01-2016 executed revival letter for the said loan even though he neglected to clear the dues inspite of repeated demands.

3.The further case of the plaintiff is that the defendant is liable to pay an amount of

Rs. 69,828-00/- (Rupees Sixty nine thousand eight hundred and twenty eight only).

with subsequent future interest as on 02-01-2016 and also the plaintiff bank is entitled for recovery the above said loan amount from the defendants together till the date of realization of the total amount. Hence, this suit.

4.On receipt of notice the defendant failed to appear appear before this court. As such, he was set ex-parte.

5.To support the case of plaintiff, Sri. B. Venkanna who is the representative of plaintiff bank got himself examined as Pw-1 and filed chief examination affidavit.

Exhibit A1 to A4 documents were marked on behalf of the plaintiff. Ex.A-1 is the

Original term loan and Hypothecation Agreement Dated 18-02-2013. Ex.A-2 is the

Original Letter of arrangement dated 18-02-2013. Ex.A-3 is the Original Revival letter

Dated 02-01-2016. Ex.A-4 is the Original statement of account copy dated 25-07-2018.

6. Heard the learned counsel for plaintiff.

7.Now the point to be determined is: Whether plaintiff is entitled for recovery of

Rs.69,828/- (Rupees Sixty nine thousand eight hundred and twenty eight only).

Along with interest from the defendants as prayed for ?

8.POINT: Theevidence of P.w.1 discloses that, he is the Bank Manager of Plaintiff

Bank Siddipet Branch. It is the evidence of P.w.1 is that, Bank sanctioned the business loan an amount of Rs. 65,000/- was sanctioned to the defendants. The defendants executed Hypothecation of Agreement and availed the loan amount through the Account

No. 32832710621 but the defendant failed to repay the loan amount as per installments.

Therefore, he prayed to decree the suit for an amount of Rs. 69,828-00 p.s. (Rupees Sixty nine thousand eight hundred and twenty eight only) along with interest.

9.In support of his contention he got marked Ex.A1 to A4, which are goes to show that the plaintiff Bank sanctioned business loan of Rs.65,000/- to the defendants under

Ex.A-1 and Ex.A-2, the defendants also executed Ex.A.3, From Ex.A-4 it is evident about transaction of defendants loan account.

11.IN THE RESULT, the suit is decreed with costs against the defendant for recovery of an amount of Rs. 69,828/- (Rupees Sixty nine thousand eight hundred and twenty eight only) and subsequent interest @ 12 % per annum from the date of suit till the date of decree and thereafter @ 6 % per annum till realization on the principal suit amount Rs. Rs. 65,000/-.

Typed to my Dictation by the Stenographer G-III, transcribed by her, corrected and

pronounced by me in open court on this the 15th day of March, 2019.

PRINCIPAL JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE,

SIDDIPET.

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

WITNESSES EXAMINED

For PLAINTIFF:For DEFENDANT:

P.W.1: B. Venkanna.– None –

Documents marked on behalf of Plaintiff:

Ex.A-1 is the Original term loan and Hypothecation Agreement Dated 18-02-2013.

Ex.A-2 is the Original Letter of arrangement dated 18-02-2013.

Ex.A-3 is the Original Revival letter Dated 02-01-2016.

Ex.A-4 is the Original statement of account copy dated 25-07-2018.

Documents marked on behalf of Defendants: -NIL-

PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE,

SIDDIPET.

OS/242/2018

State Bank of India ADB vs Chandroju Srinivas

15 Mar 2019

IN THE COURT OF THE PRINCIPAL JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE

AT SIDDIPET

PRESENT: Sri. Sampath CH,

Prl. Junior Civil Judge,

Siddipet.

Friday, the 15th day of March, 2019.

O.S.NO. 242 of 2018

Between:

State Bank of India, Siddipet Branch, Rep. by its Chief Manager, Smt. Kasubatla Lalitha. …PLAINTIFF

AND

Chandroju Srinivas, S/o. Pentaiah, age: major, Occ: Business, R/o. Thimmaipally village, Nangunoor Mandla, Siddipet District. …DEFENDANT

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

1.This is the suit for recovery of money an amount of Rs. 74,513/- (Rupees Seventy four thousand five hundred and thirteen only).

2.The case of the plaintiff bank is that, the defendant approached plaintiff-bank for sanction and release of business. Accordingly, the plaintiff bank sanctioned an amount of

Rs. 70,000/- to the defendant and released under Account number 32856573720, the defendant agreed the terms and conditions as per sanction to repay the loan within 64 equal monthly installments from June, 2013 with the interest of 12.45% p.a. The defendant also executed Hypothecation Dated 02-03-2013 and also letter of agreement on the same day in favour of the plaintiff bank, the defendant failed to pay regular payment. As such on 25-02-2016 executed revival letter for the said loan even though he neglected to clear the dues inspite of repeated demands.

3.The further case of the plaintiff is that the defendant is liable to pay an amount of

Rs. 74,513/- (Rupees Seventy four thousand five hundred and thirteen only) with subsequent future interest as on 25-02-2016 and also the plaintiff bank is entitled for recovery the above said loan amount from the defendants together till the date of realization of the total amount. Hence, this suit.

4.On receipt of notice the defendant failed to appear appear before this court. As such, he was set ex-parte.

5.To support the case of plaintiff, Sri. B. Venkanna who is the representative of plaintiff bank got himself examined as Pw-1 and filed chief examination affidavit.

Exhibit A1 to A4 documents were marked on behalf of the plaintiff. Ex.A-1 is the

Original term loan and Hypothecation Agreement Dated 02-03-2013. Ex.A-2 is the

Original Letter of arrangement dated 02-03-2013 . Ex.A-3 is the Original Revival letter

Dated 25-02-2016. Ex.A-4 is the Original statement of account copy dated 25-07-2018.

6. Heard the learned counsel for plaintiff.

7.Now the point to be determined is: Whether plaintiff is entitled for recovery of

Rs. 74,513/- (Rupees Seventy four thousand five hundred and thirteen only). Along with interest from the defendants as prayed for ?

8.POINT: Theevidence of P.w.1 discloses that, he is the Bank Manager of Plaintiff

Bank Siddipet Branch. It is the evidence of P.w.1 is that, Bank sanctioned the business loan an amount of Rs. 70,000/- was sanctioned to the defendants. The defendants executed Hypothecation of Agreement and availed the loan amount through the Account

No. 32856573720 but the defendant failed to repay the loan amount as per installments.

Therefore, he prayed to decree the suit for an amount of Rs. 74,513/- (Rupees Seventy four thousand five hundred and thirteen only) along with interest.

9.In support of his contention he got marked Ex.A1 to A4, which are goes to show that the plaintiff Bank sanctioned business loan of Rs.70,000/- to the defendants under

Ex.A-1 and Ex.A-2, the defendants also executed Ex.A.3, From Ex.A-4 it is evident about transaction of defendants loan account.

11.IN THE RESULT, the suit is decreed with costs against the defendant for recovery of an amount of Rs. 74,513/- (Rupees Seventy four thousand five hundred and thirteen only) and subsequent interest @ 12 % per annum from the date of suit till the date of decree and thereafter @ 6 % per annum till realization on the principal suit amount Rs. 70,000/.

Typed to my Dictation by the Stenographer G-III, transcribed by her, corrected and

pronounced by me in open court on this the 15th day of March, 2019.

PRINCIPAL JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE,

SIDDIPET.

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

WITNESSES EXAMINED

For PLAINTIFF:For DEFENDANT:

P.W.1: B. Venkanna.– None –

Documents marked on behalf of Plaintiff:

Ex.A-1 is the Original term loan and Hypothecation Agreement Dated 02-03-2013.

Ex.A-2 is the Original Letter of arrangement dated 02-03-2013.

Ex.A-3 is the Original Revival letter Dated 25-02-2016.

Ex.A-4 is the Original statement of account copy dated 25-07-2018.

Documents marked on behalf of Defendant: -NIL-

PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE,

SIDDIPET.

OS/59/2017

Makkala Sailu vs Pallepu Narsaiah

15 Mar 2019

IN THE COURT OF THE PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE

AT SIDDIPET

PRESENT: SRI. SAMPATH CH, Prl. Junior Civil Judge,

Siddipet.

Friday, this the 15th day of March, 2018.

O.S.NO. 59 of 2017

Between:

Makkala Sailu, S/o. Rajaiah, age: 75 years, occ: coolie, R/o. Velkatoor village of Nangunoor Mandal, Siddipet District.

…PLAINTIFF

AND

1. Pallepu Narsaiah, S/o. Venkataiah age: 36 years, Occ; coolie, R/o. Gajasingavaram village, Gambhirraopet village, Rajanna, Siricilla.

2. Pallepu Erraiah, S/o. Narsaiah, age: 55 years, Occ: agriculture, R/o. Gajasingavaram village, Gambhirraopet village, Rajanna, Siricilla.

…DEFENDANTS

This suit is coming on 14-03-2019 before me for hearing in the presence of Sri. L. Sai Baba, counsel for the Plaintiff; the defendants called absent, no representation and set ex-parte, this court delivered the following:

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

1.This is a suit filed for recovery of Rs.1,00,000/- with costs and subsequent interest basing on the promissory note dated 30-05-2015 with the following averments.

2.It is the case of the plaintiff that the plaintiff and defendant No.1 and 2 are close friends and relatives, the defendant No.1 borrowed an amount of

Rs.1,00,000/- from him on 30-05-2015 and the defendant executed demand promissory note for the same amount in favor of the plaintiff by agreeing to repay the amount on his demand. The defendant No.2 stood as guarantor for the pronote amount and signed as a guarantor on promissory note on the

Prl. J.C.J. Siddipet 2 same day. In spite of repeated demands made by the plaintiff, the defendant No.1 and 2 failed to repay the said amount. Hence, the suit.

3.After receipt of the summons the defendants failed to appear before the court. As such, they remained set exparte.

4. Heard the learned counsel for plaintiff. Perused the record.

5.Now the point for determination is:

Whether the plaintiff is entitled to recovery the suit amount from

the defendants as prayed for ?

POINT:

6.During the trial the plaintiff himself examined as P.W.1 and got marked Ex.A-1 to Ex.A-5. Ex.A-1 is Original promissory note Dated 30-05-2015. Ex.A-2 is the Office copy of legal notice dated Dated 02-03- 2017, Ex.A-3 is the Returned refusal notice of Pallepu Narsaiah, Ex.A-4 is the Returned refusal notice of Pellepu Erraiah, Ex.A-5 is the Original postal receipts on Dated 02-03-2017.

7.PW.1 categorically reiterated the averments of the plaint in his chief examination affidavit. PW.1 stated that the defendant No.1 borrowed an amount of Rs.1,00,000/- from him on 30-05-2015 and executed Ex.A.1 original promissory note in his favour, the defendant No.2 stood as guarantee for the promissory note amount. Subsequently the plaintiff also issued legal notice under Ex.A-2, in turn the defendants refused to receive notice under Ex.A-3 and Ex.A-4. There is no evidence on behalf of the defendants to disprove the execution of Ex.A.1 and they remained set ex- parte. So the oral evidence of P.W.1 coupled with Ex.A-1 to Ex.A-5 stands unrebutted and proved by the plaintiff. Hence, it is held that the suit promissory note dated 30-05-2015 is true, valid and binding on the defendants and that the plaintiff proved that the defendant No.1 borrowed amount from him and executed Ex.A-1/promissory note in his favor, defendant No.2 stood as guarantor for the amount but they did not repaid the same to the plaintiff. Therefore, the plaintiff is entitled to recover the suit amount from the defendants as prayed for. Accordingly, this point is answered in favor of the plaintiff against the defendants.

Prl. J.C.J. Siddipet 3

6.In the result, the suit is decreed with costs for an amount of

Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees one lakh only) in favour of the plaintiff against the defendants with subsequent interest at the rate of 12% p.a from the date of filing of suit, till the date of decree and thereafter at the rate of 6% p.a. till the date of realization on the principal amount of Rs. 1,00,000/-.

Typed to my Dictation by the Stenographer G-III, transcribed by her, corrected and pronounced by me in open court on this the 15th day of March, 2019.

PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE,

SIDDIPET.

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

WITNESSES EXAMINED

For PLAINTIFF: For DEFENDANTS:

P.W.1: Makkala Sailu. – None –

Documents marked on behalf of Plaintiff:

Ex.A-1 is Original promissory note Dated 30-05-2015.

Ex.A-2 is the Office copy of legal notice dated Dated 02-03-2017,

Ex.A-3 is the Returned refusal notice of Pallepu Narsaiah,

Ex.A-4 is the Returned refusal notice of Pellepu Erraiah,

Ex.A-5 is the Original postal receipts on Dated 02-03-2017.

Documents marked on behalf of Defendant:

-NIL-

PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE,

SIDDIPET.

Prl. J.C.J. Siddipet

Order Record 74 total

Case No.	Parties	Date	Type	Outcome
OS/59/2017	Makkala Sailu vs Pallepu Narsaiah	15 Mar 2019	Decreed	—
OS/242/2018	State Bank of India ADB vs Chandroju Srinivas	15 Mar 2019	Decreed	—
OS/243/2018	State Bank of India ADB, Siddipet Branch vs Mahadevoju Ramesh	15 Mar 2019	Decreed	—
OS/244/2018	State Bank of India - ADB Siddipet Branch vs Pedishetti Yadagiri	15 Mar 2019	Decreed	—
OS/265/2018	A.P Grameena Vikas Bank Kukunoorpalli Branch vs Nanubala Narsimha Reddy	15 Mar 2019	Decreed	—
OS/287/2018	Amudala Srinivas vs Lingala Chandraiah	15 Mar 2019	Decreed	—
OS/293/2018	Kandala Balalaxmi vs Yasareni@ Mergu Bhoomaiah	15 Mar 2019	Dismissed	—
OS/322/2018	Muthyam Mahender vs Muthyam Gouravva	15 Mar 2019	Decreed	—
CC/96/2012	PS, Siddipet I Town vs Sipliganj Prasad	15 Mar 2019	Convicted	—
CC/97/2012	PS, Siddipet I Town vs Jampala Sanjeev Kumar	15 Mar 2019	Convicted	—
CC/100051/2018	bethe sheela vs Vsgujjari praveen	15 Mar 2019	Aquittal	—
CC/100072/2017	Mangu Harihar rao vs Ellu Srikanthreddy	15 Mar 2019	Aquittal	—
CC/100077/2016	Raddari srinivas vs Vschitti Kondal Rao	15 Mar 2019	Convicted	—
CC/100123/2017	Donthireeddy Srinivas Rao vs Bodasu Narsimulu	15 Mar 2019	Aquittal	—
OS/265/2008	Peerlapalli Malla Reddy vs Jilla Krishna	13 Mar 2019	Dismissed	—
OS/282/2012	Peddi Mallesham vs P. Chandra Sekar	08 Mar 2019	Dismissed	—
CC/100161/2015	Reshma Sulthana vs Mohd Jahangir	07 Mar 2019	Aquittal	—
OS/13/2018	Gurram Balaiah vs Pasuladi Sailu	28 Feb 2019	Decreed	—
OS/36/2012	T. Yadavva vs K. Eshwaramm	28 Feb 2019	Decreed	—
OS/121/2018	Podishetty Maisamma vs Mohd. Muneerpasha	28 Feb 2019	Decreed	—
OS/167/2018	Mohd. Yousuf vs Bingi Narsaiah	28 Feb 2019	Decreed	—
OS/321/2018	Appisa Mallavva vs Appisa Mallaiah	28 Feb 2019	Decreed	—
CC/100082/2015	Ambai Yellamma vs Ambati Sudhakar	28 Feb 2019	Aquittal	—
CC/100087/2015	K.Muraliprasad, SI of police vs Oggu Yadaiah	28 Feb 2019	Aquittal	—
OS/96/2012	Rodda Ramkrishna Reddy vs Marka Narsimlu	27 Feb 2019	Dismissed	—
OS/269/2010	Neela Kanaka Raju vs Neela Yellavva	26 Feb 2019	Dismissed	—
OS/192/2017	Indian Overseas bank vs Rekulapally Raji Reddy	25 Feb 2019	Decreed	—
OS/205/2018	Kadurla Raju vs Chinnarajigani Rajaiah	25 Feb 2019	Decreed	—
OS/218/2017	Indian Overseas Bank, Rep Its Manager Batta Krushna Biswal vs Yennam Ravinder Reddy	25 Feb 2019	Decreed	—
OS/261/2018	Jakkireddy Chandra Reddy vs Challa Rajitha	25 Feb 2019	Decreed	—
OS/320/2018	Uppala Lavanya vs Chinthakindi Nagaiah	25 Feb 2019	Decreed	—
CC/92/2012	PS, Siddipet I Town vs Bangaram Ravi	22 Feb 2019	Aquittal	—
CC/100054/2018	manuka rajitha vs Vsmanuka srinivas	22 Feb 2019	Aquittal	—
CC/100119/2017	Bachu Rani vs Kallaltia Raaju alias Durgaprasad	22 Feb 2019	Aquittal	—
CC/100115/2017	Pullaiahgari Srinivas Reddy vs Lakkireddy Rajireddy	21 Feb 2019	Aquittal	—
OS/87/2018	Ramakkapeta .Kanakaiah vs Chilkoti. Raji.Reddy.	20 Feb 2019	Decreed	—
OS/149/2018	P. Mahender reddy vs D.S. Chandramohan reddy	20 Feb 2019	Decreed	—
OS/97/2018	Nimma Manjula vs Barla. Pedda Ramchandra Reddy.	13 Feb 2019	Decreed	—
CC/100075/2016	N. Indrasenareddy vs Kadari Ramulu	11 Feb 2019	Aquittal	—
OS/76/2015	Md. Saheb Hussain vs P. Rekha	08 Feb 2019	Decreed	—
CC/100005/2016	N.Indrasenareddy vs Vangari Vamshi	08 Feb 2019	Aquittal	—
CC/100046/2018	suthari sarojana vs Vssuthari koteshwar	06 Feb 2019	Aquittal	—
OS/128/2018	Putta Balnarsaiah vs Chilumula Srinivas	04 Feb 2019	Decreed	—
OS/204/2018	Telu Mallaiah vs Telu Narsavva	04 Feb 2019	Decreed	—
OS/232/2018	Konaipally Shyamala vs Balaraju Yashoda	04 Feb 2019	Decreed	—
OS/286/2013	Gunnala Narsimhulu vs Vadla Konda Shambaiah	31 Jan 2019	Decreed	—
OS/320/2013	Poola Balavva vs Tadasina Guruvareddy	31 Jan 2019	Decreed	—
CC/100001/2019	PS SIddipet I town vs Chikkudu Sudhakar	31 Jan 2019	Aquittal	—
CC/100045/2017	Vorakanti kankaiah vs Komaravelli anjaiah	31 Jan 2019	Aquittal	—
CC/100064/2016	Md.Sony vs Md.Saleem	30 Jan 2019	Aquittal	—
OS/240/2018	State Bank of India ADB vs Gonepally Siddulu	29 Jan 2019	Decreed	—
OS/241/2018	Smt. K. Lalitha vs Baddipadaga Navya	29 Jan 2019	Decreed	—
OS/209/2018	Ambati Naresh vs Bolgam Lachavva	28 Jan 2019	Decreed as prayed for	—
OS/316/2018	Basireddygari Srikanth Reddy vs Veerabathini Janardhan	28 Jan 2019	Decreed as prayed for	—
OS/33/2017	Vadla @ Ralabandi narsimulu vs P..V. Sunder	25 Jan 2019	Decreed as prayed for	—
OS/221/2018	Kosanagottu Ramesh @ Ramulu and 2 others vs The Commissioner, Municipal council, Siddipet	25 Jan 2019	Decreed	—
OS/312/2013	C. Mounika vs C. Bhoopathi Reddy	25 Jan 2019	Decreed	—
CC/100044/2018	mothe roja vs Vsmd.asif	25 Jan 2019	Convicted	—
CC/18/2016	PS, Siddipet I Town vs Kolan Nagaraju	23 Jan 2019	Aquittal	—
OS/6/2018	Batta Krushna Biswal vs Gopulapuram Swaraj Kumar	10 Dec 2018	Decreed	—
OS/52/2018	Pashikanti Narsaiah vs Marupally Srinivas Goud	10 Dec 2018	Decreed	—
OS/190/2017	Indian overseas bank vs Kommera Venkat Reddy	10 Dec 2018	Decreed	—
OS/49/2018	Purushotham Balamallu vs Jerripothu Mallaiah	03 Dec 2018	Decreed	—
OS/137/2018	Pulluri Anjaiah vs Kandukuri Brahmaiah	17 Nov 2018	Decreed	—
OS/138/2018	Gourishetty Rajesham vs Kandukuri Brahmaiah	17 Nov 2018	Decreed	—
OS/139/2018	Chepuri Sandhya Rani vs Kandukuri Brahmaiah	17 Nov 2018	Decreed	—
OS/140/2018	Gourishetty Anjaneyulu vs Kandukuri Brahmaiah	17 Nov 2018	Decreed	—
OS/141/2018	Gajabhinkar Yadilal vs Kandukuri Brahmaiah	17 Nov 2018	Decreed	—
OS/105/2018	Uppara Bharathavva vs Myakala Gattumallu	27 Sep 2018	Decreed	—
OS/20/2018	Perla kanakaiah vs Perla Narsaiah	24 Jul 2018	Decreed	—
CC/100060/2016	Gade Susheela vs Gade Sathaiah	16 Jul 2018	Aquittal	—
OS/69/2018	Annaram Arjun vs Kurella @ Rajupeta Muthyalavva	26 Jun 2018	Decreed	—
CC/69/2010	Vadlakonda Rajeshwari vs A1 Manthapuri Yadagiri	28 Feb 2018	Aquittal	—
CC/73/2014	PS, Siddipet I Town vs Kotagiri Srinivas	10 Jan 2018	Aquittal	—

Monthly Orders (Last 12 Months)

Mar 2019		17
Feb 2019		28
Jan 2019		14
Dec 2018		5
Nov 2018		5
Sep 2018		1
Jul 2018		2
Jun 2018		1
Feb 2018		1
Jan 2018		1

Frequently Asked Questions

How many cases has SAMPATH CHALLURI handled?

SAMPATH CHALLURI has handled 75 court orders since 2017 at Siddipet, PDJ Court Complex. The average disposal rate is 5 orders per month.

What types of cases does SAMPATH CHALLURI hear?

Based on available records, SAMPATH CHALLURI primarily handles Civil matters (Original Suits) and Criminal matters (Criminal Cases) at Siddipet, PDJ Court Complex.

Where is SAMPATH CHALLURI currently posted?

SAMPATH CHALLURI is posted as Prl Junior Civil Judge at Siddipet, PDJ Court Complex, Siddipet, Telangana.

Are judgments by SAMPATH CHALLURI available online?

Yes. 5 judgments by SAMPATH CHALLURI are available on Legistro with full text, outcome, and sections cited.

How fast does SAMPATH CHALLURI dispose cases?

SAMPATH CHALLURI disposes approximately 5 cases per month, based on 75 orders handled over their tenure at Siddipet, PDJ Court Complex.

Since when is SAMPATH CHALLURI serving?

SAMPATH CHALLURI has been serving at Siddipet, PDJ Court Complex since 2017.

Case Types

OS 68%

CC 32%

Posting History

Nov 2017 — Mar 2019

Prl Junior Civil Judge · 75 orders
Nov 2017 — Dec 2017

Addl Junior Civil Judge

Other Judges at this Court

Sri.Y.Jaya Prasad

I Additional District and Sessions Judge, Siddipe...

343 orders

Smt K. Sai Rama Devi

Prinicpal District and Siddipet Sessions Judge, Si...

360 orders

Mrs. Bollepally Sadhana

Principal Junior Civil Judge cum Judicial Magistr...

217 orders

Vemuganti Tharani

I Additional Junior Civil Judge-cum-I Additional J...

288 orders

Smt.K.Sowjanya

II Additional Junior Civil Judge-cum-Judicial Magi...

5 orders

Sri N Santosh Kumar

Principal Senior Civil Siddipet Judge-cum- Assista...

128 orders

Sri A. Kumara Swamy

Additional Senior Civil Judge cum Additional Assis...

0 orders

← View all judges at Siddipet, PDJ Court Complex