Shaik Ayesha Sareen

Junior Civil Judge

Huzurnagar, ADJ Court Complex · Suryapet · Telangana

SHAIK AYESHA SAREEN, Junior Civil Judge, is posted at Huzurnagar, ADJ Court Complex, Suryapet, Telangana, India. 132 court orders on record since 2025. 5 judgments with full text available. Primarily handles CC, OS, PRC cases.

132

Total Orders

Judgments

Orders/Month

Postings

Featured Judgments

OS/263/2024

Gurram Sandeep Reddy vs Kodumuri Veera Reddy

24 Mar 2026

Page 1 of 4 O.S.No. 263 of 2024

Dt: 24.03.2026

IN THE COURT OF ADDL.JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT HUZURNAGAR

Dated this the 24th day of March, 2026

Present: Smt. Shaik Ayesha Sareen,

Addl. Junior Civil Judge, Huzurnagar.

O.S.No. 263 of 2024

Between:

Gurram Sandeep Reddy, S/o. Srinivasa Reddy, Aged about 32 years, Occ:Pvt. Employye, R/o. Ramapuram Village, Mellachervu Mandal, Suryapet district. …Plaintiff

And

Kodumuri Veera Reddy, S/o. Narsi Reddy, Aged about 33 years, Occ:Agriculture, R/o. H.No. 3-212, Mulugundam Village, Aspari Mandal, Kurnool District, A.P., …Defendant

This suit is coming up before me on 12.03.2026 for final hearing in the presence of Sri. P. Srinivasa Rao, Advocate for the Plaintiff and defendant remained Exparte; upon perusing the material on record and after hearing the arguments, this Court made the following:-

J U D G M E N T

1.The plaintiff filed this suit for recovery of an amount of

Rs.1,71,533/- (Rupees One Lakh Seventy One Thousand Five Hundred and Thirty Three only) being the principal and subsequent interest with following averments.

2. That the plaintiff and defendant are well acquainted with each other, out of said acquaintance on 22.07.2021 the defendant borrowed and received an amount of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh only) from the plaintiff to meet his family expenses and on the same

Page 2 of 4 O.S.No. 263 of 2024

Dt: 24.03.2026

day the defendant executed suit promissory note at Ramapuram

Village, Mellachervu Mandal, Suryapet District in favor of plaintiff agreeing to repay the same along with interest @ 24% per annum either to plaintiff or to his order on demand. Thereafter the plaintiff made several demands with the defendant to repay the amount due under the promissory note with the interest but the defendant postponed the same on one pretext or the other; finally on 10.06.2024 the plaintiff got issued a legal notice to the defendant calling upon him to repay the amount due under the promissory note.

Inspite of received the said legal notice, the defendant got issued

Reply notice, dt: 05.07.2024 with all false allegations; as such the plaintiff was constrained to file this suit.

3.After registering the case, Summons were issued to defendant, but the defendant despite sufficient services summons did not turn up, hence he was said exparte. Thereafter, the plaintiff got himself examined as PW1 and got marked Ex.A1 to A3. The plaintiff also got examined PW2 on his behalf.

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

5. Now the points for consideration are:

1) Whether the plaintiff is entitled for recovery of the suit amount as prayed for?

2) To what relief?

Page 3 of 4 O.S.No. 263 of 2024

Dt: 24.03.2026

6. POINT No.1

In a suit for recovery of money on the basis of promissory note the initial burden will always be upon the plaintiff to prove the execution of the promissory note by the defendant. When the plaintiff discharges his burden, the burden shifts on to the defendant to disprove the said contention of the plaintiff by rebutting the same with his evidence. In the present case, the plaintiff has discharged his burden by adducing evidence on his behalf and by marking Ex.A1 which is suit Promissory note, dated 22.07.2021, Ex.A2 which is office copy of Legal Notice, dated 10.06.2024 and Ex.A3 which is Reply

Notice, dated 05.07.2024. The plaintiff also got examined PW2 who is the one of the attester of Ex.A1 who deposed in the same lines as that of PW1. Hence the plaintiff is benefited by the statutory presumption under section 118(a) of Negotiable Instruments Act, that the suit promissory note is supported by consideration. On the other hand, the defendant inspite of sufficient service of summons did not appear before this court to contest the suit on merits and to rebut the presumption raised by the plaintiff. Therefore as the plaintiff has adduced evidence on her behalf to prove her contention and as the said contention of the plaintiff stood unrebutted and unchallenged by the defendant, the plaintiff is entitled for recovery of suit amount as prayed for. This point is accordingly answered in favour of the plaintiff.

Page 4 of 4 O.S.No. 263 of 2024

Dt: 24.03.2026

7. POINT No.2.

IN THE RESULT, the suit is decreed with costs for an amount of

Rs.1,71,533/- (Rupees One Lakh Seventy One Thousand Five Hundred and

Thirty Three only) with subsequent interest @ 12% per annum from the date of suit till the date of decree and @ 6% per annum from the date of decree till the date of realization on the principal amount of

Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh only).

(Typed to my dictation by the Stenographer, corrected and pronounced by me in the Open Court, on this the 24 th day of March, 2026).

Sd/-

ADDL.JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE

HUZURNAGAR

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

WITNESSES EXAMINED

For Plaintiff:- For Defendants:-

PW-1: Gurram Sandeep Reddy---Exparte--- PW-2: Bade Rambabu

EXHIBITS MARKED

For Plaintiff:

Ex.A1 : Original Promissory Note, dated: 22.07.201.

Ex.A2 : Office copy of Legal Notice, dated 10.06.2024

Ex.A3 : Reply Notice, dated 05.07.2024

For Defendant: --Nil--

Sd/-

ADDL.JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE

HUZURNAGAR

OS/331/2025

JANGA GANGADHAR RAO vs SHAIK HAFEEZ

24 Mar 2026

Page 1 of 4 O.S.No. 331 of 2025

Dt: 24.03.2026

IN THE COURT OF ADDL.JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT HUZURNAGAR

Dated this the 24th day of March, 2026

Present: Smt. Shaik Ayesha Sareen,

Addl. Junior Civil Judge, Huzurnagar.

O.S.No. 331 of 2025

Between: Janga Gangadhar Rao, S/o. Chandra Narayana, Aged about 72 years, Occ:Rtd.Employee, R/o. Mattampally Village & Mandal, Suryapet District. …Plaintiff

And

Shaik Hafeez, S/o. Adam Shafi, Aged about 32 years, Occ: RMP, R/o.Pedaveedu Village, Mattampally Mandal, Suryapet District.

…Defendant

This suit is coming up before me on 05.03.2026 for final hearing in the presence of Sri.D. Narayana Reddy, Advocate for the Plaintiff and defendant remained Exparte; upon perusing the material on record and after hearing the arguments, this Court made the following:-

J U D G M E N T

1. The plaintiff filed this suit for recovery of an amount of

Rs.1,13,600/- (Rupees One Lakh Thirteen Thousand Six Hundred only) being the principal and subsequent interest with following averments.

2. That the plaintiff and defendant are well acquainted with each other, out of said acquaintance on 09.03.2022 the defendant approached and borrowed an amount of Rs.1,00,000/-(Rupees One

Lakh only) from the plaintiff on 09.03.2022 and on the same day, the

Page 2 of 4 O.S.No. 331 of 2025

Dt: 24.03.2026

defendant executed suit promissory note at Mattampalli Village in favor of plaintiff agreeing to repay the same along with interest rate @ 24% per annum either to plaintiff or to his order on demand.

Thereafter, on 21.11.2023 the defendant paid an amount of

Rs.50,000/- to the plaintiff and endorsed the same on the reverse of the promissory note. Later, the plaintiff made several oral demands to the defendant for the repayment of the balance amount due under the promissory note with interest but the defendant postponed the same on one pretext or the other. On 27.09.2025 the plaintiff got issued a legal notice to the defendant calling upon him to repay the amount due under the promissory note, but the defendant did not repay the amount, as such the plaintiff was constrained to file this suit.

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

5. Now the points for consideration are:

1) Whether the plaintiff is entitled for recovery of the suit amount as prayed for?

2) To what relief?

Page 3 of 4 O.S.No. 331 of 2025

Dt: 24.03.2026

6. POINT No.1:

In a suit for recovery of money on the basis of promissory note the initial burden will always be upon the plaintiff to prove the execution of the promissory note by the defendant. When the plaintiff discharges his burden, the burden shifts on to the defendant to disprove the said contention of the plaintiff by rebutting the same with his evidence. In the present case the plaintiff has discharged his burden by adducing evidence on his behalf and by marking Ex.A1 which is suit Promissory note dated 09.03.2022, Ex.A2 which is Part payment endorsement on the reverse of the promissory note, dated: 21.11.2023, Ex.A3 which is the Office copy of Legal Notice dt:27.09.2025 and Ex.A4 Postal

Receipt, dt:27.09.2025. Hence the plaintiff is benefited by the statutory presumption under section 118(a) of Negotiable

Instruments Act, that the suit promissory note is supported by consideration. On the other hand, inspite of sufficient service of summons, the defendant did not appear before this court to contest the suit on merits and to rebut the presumption raised by the plaintiff. Therefore as the plaintiff has adduced evidence on his behalf to prove his contention and as the said contention of the plaintiff stood unrebutted and unchallenged by the defendant, the plaintiff is entitled for recovery of suit amount as prayed for. This point is accordingly answered in favour of the plaintiff.

Page 4 of 4 O.S.No. 331 of 2025

Dt: 24.03.2026

7. POINT No.2.

IN THE RESULT, the suit is decreed with costs for an amount of Rs.1,13,600/- (Rupees One Lakh Thirteen Thousand Six Hundred only) with subsequent interest @ 12% per annum from the date of suit till the date of decree and @ 6% per annum from the date of decree till the date of realization on the principal amount of

Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh only).

(Typed to my dictation by the Stenographer, corrected and pronounced by me in the Open Court, on this the 24 th day of March, 2026) .

Sd/-

ADDL.JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE

HUZURNAGAR

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

WITNESSES EXAMINED

For Plaintiff:- For Defendants:-

PW-1: Janga Gangadhar Rao---Exparte---

EXHIBITS MARKED

For Plaintiff:

Ex.A1 :Original Promissory Note, dt: 09.03.2022 executed by defendant in favor of plaintiff

Ex.A2 :Endorsement made on the back side of the promissory note,

dt: 21.11.2023

Ex.A3 :Office copy of Legal Notice dt:27.09.2025

Ex.A4 :Postal Receipt dt: 27.09.2025

For Defendant: --Nil--

Sd/-

ADDL.JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE

HUZURNAGAR

OS/171/2025

Bapanapally Rajeswari vs Jakkali Srinivas

25 Mar 2026

Page 1 of 4 O.S.No.175 of 2025,

Dt: 25.03.2026

IN THE COURT OF ADDL.JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT HUZURNAGAR.

Dated this the 25th day of March, 2026

Present: Smt. Shaik Ayesha Sareen, Addl. Junior Civil Judge, Huzurnagar.

O.S.No.171 OF 2025

Between:

Bapanapally Rajeswari, W/o. Raja Rao (late), Aged about 60 years, Occ:Chicken Business, named and styled as Raja Chicken Center, R/o.Mattampally Village & Mandal, Suryapet District. …Plaintiff

And

Jakkali Srinivas, S/o. Lingaiah, Aged about 49 years, Occ: Business, R/o.Mattampally Village and Mandal, Suryapet District. …Defendant

This suit is coming up before me on 09.03.2026 for final hearing in the presence of Sri.Ch.Krishnaiah, Learned counsel for the Plaintiff and defendant remained Exparte; upon perusing the material on record and after hearing the arguments, this Court made the following:-

J U D G M E N T

1. The plaintiff filed this suit for recovery of money on the basis of promissory note for an amount of Rs.2,75,800/- (Rupees Two Lakhs

Seventy Five Thousand and Eight Hundred only) being the principal and subsequent interest with following averments.

2. That the plaintiff and defendant are well acquainted with each other and are same villagers, out of said acquaintance on 18.05.2023 the defendant borrowed and received an amount of Rs.2,00,000/-(Rupees

Page 2 of 4 O.S.No.175 of 2025,

Dt: 25.03.2026

Two Lakhs only) from the plaintiff to meet his family expenses and on the same day the defendant executed promissory note at residence of plaintiff at Mattampally Village & Mandal, Suryapet District in favor of plaintiff agreeing to repay the same along with interest @ 18% per annum either to plaintiff or to his order on demand. Thereafter despite repeated oral demands made by the plaintiff, the defendant did not repay the amount, as such the plaintiff issued legal notice to the defendant on 15.06.2025 but the defendant neither replied nor repaid the amount as such the plaintiff was constrained to file this suit.

3. The defendant after sufficient service of summons did not turn up, hence he was set exparte. Thereafter the plaintiff herself got examined PW-1 and got marked Ex.A1/Original Promissory Note,

Dt:18.05.2023. The plaintiff also got examined PW-2 on her behalf.

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

5. Now the points for consideration are:

1) Whether the plaintiff is entitled for recovery of the suit amount as prayed for?

2) To what relief?

Page 3 of 4 O.S.No.175 of 2025,

Dt: 25.03.2026

6. POINT No.1

In a suit for recovery of money on the basis of promissory note the initial burden will always be upon the plaintiff to prove the execution of the promissory note by the defendant. When the plaintiff discharges her burden, the burden shifts on to the defendant to disprove the said contention of the plaintiff by rebutting the same with her evidence. In the present case the plaintiff has discharged her burden by adducing evidence on her behalf and by marking Ex.A1 which is suit promissory note dated 18.05.2023. The plaintiff also got examined PW-2 who is the attester of Ex.A1 who deposed in the same lines as that of PW-1.

Hence the plaintiff is benefited by the statutory presumption under section 118(a) of Negotiable Instruments Act, that the suit promissory note is supported by consideration. On the other hand, the defendant inspite of sufficient service of summons did not turn up and did not choose to contest the suit on merits to rebut the presumption raised by the plaintiff. Therefore as the plaintiff has adduced evidence on her behalf to prove her contention and as the said contention of the plaintiff stood unrebutted and unchallenged by the defendant, the plaintiff will be entitled for the recovery of the suit amount as prayed for. This point is accordingly answered in favour of the plaintiff.

Page 4 of 4 O.S.No.175 of 2025,

Dt: 25.03.2026

7. POINT No.2

IN THE RESULT, the suit is decreed with costs for an amount of

Rs.2,75,800/- (Rupees Two Lakhs Seventy Five Thousand and Eight

Hundred only) with subsequent interest @ 12% per annum from the date of suit till the date of decree and @ 6% per annum from the date of decree till the date of realization on the principal amount of Rs.2,00,000/- (Rupees Two Lakhs Only).

(Typed to my dictation by the Stenographer Gr-III, corrected and

pronounced by me in the Open Court, on this the 25 th day of March, 2026).

Sd/-

ADDL.JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE

HUZURNAGAR

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

WITNESSES EXAMINED

For Plaintiff:- For Defendant:-

PW-1 : Bapanapally Rajeswari --Exparte-- PW-2 : Mallikanti Buchaiah

EXHIBITS MARKED

For Plaintiff: Ex.A1: Original Demand Promissory Note, Dt:18.05.2023

For Defendant: --Nil--

Sd/-

ADDL.JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE

HUZURNAGAR

OS/106/2025

Vuppala Rama Krishna Rao vs Kothuru Venkateswarlu

25 Mar 2026

Page 1 of 4 O.S.No. 106 of 2025

Dt: 25.03.2026

IN THE COURT OF ADDL.JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT HUZURNAGAR

Dated this the 25th day of March, 2026

Present: Smt. Shaik Ayesha Sareen,

Addl. Junior Civil Judge, Huzurnagar.

O.S.No. 106 of 2025

Between:

Vuppala Rama Krishna Rao, S/o. Subbaiah, Aged about 61 years, Occ:Business, R/o. Huzurnagar Town and Mandal Suryapet district. …Plaintiff

And

Kothuru Venkateswerlu, S/o. Thirapathaiah, Aged about 65 years, Occ: Business, R/o. K.S.Enclave Apartment, Flat No. 403, Kodad Town and Mandal, Suryapet District.

…Defendant

This suit is coming up before me on 13.03.2026 for final hearing in the presence of Sri.N. Krishna Murthy, Advocate for the Plaintiff and defendant remained Exparte; upon perusing the material on record and after hearing the arguments, this Court made the following:-

J U D G M E N T

1.The plaintiff filed this suit for recovery of an amount of

Rs.1,90,650/- (Rupees One Lakh Ninety Thousand Six Hundred and

Fifty only) being the principal and subsequent interest with following averments.

2. That the defendant borrowed an amount of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees

One Lakh only) from the plaintiff on 09.03.2022 for his family expenses and on the same day the defendant executed suit

Page 2 of 4 O.S.No. 106 of 2025

Dt: 25.03.2026

promissory note at Huzurnagar Town in favor of plaintiff agreeing to repay the same along with interest @ 24% per annum on compunding yearly interest either to plaintiff or to his order on demand.

Thereafter the plaintiff made several oral demands with the defendant to repay the amount due under the promissory note with the interest but the defendant postponed the same on one pretext or the other. On 03.03.2025 the plaintiff got issued a legal notice to the defendant demanding him to repay the amount, but the defendant inspite of receiving the said legal notice, neither choose to give any reply nor paid the due amount; as such the plaintiff was constrained to file this suit.

3. The defendant after sufficient service of summons did not turn up, hence he was set exparte. Thereafter, the plaintiff himself got examined PW1 and got marked Ex.A1 to A3 documents.

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

5. Now the points for consideration are:

1) Whether the plaintiff is entitled for recovery of the suit amount as prayed for?

2) To what relief?

Page 3 of 4 O.S.No. 106 of 2025

Dt: 25.03.2026

6. POINT No.1:

In a suit for recovery of money on the basis of promissory note the initial burden will always be upon the plaintiff to prove the execution of the promissory note by the defendant. When the plaintiff discharges his burden, the burden shifts on to the defendant to disprove the said contention of the plaintiff by rebutting the same with his evidence. In the present case the plaintiff has discharged his burden by adducing evidence on his behalf and by marking Ex.A.1 which is suit Promissory note dated 09.03.2022, Ex.A2 which is Office copy of Legal Notice

dt:03.03.2025, Ex.A3 which is Postal Receipt dt:06.03.2025. Hence

the plaintiff is benefited by the statutory presumption under section 118(a) of Negotiable Instruments Act, that the suit promissory note is supported by consideration. On the other hand, the defendant did not appear before this court to contest the suit on merits and to rebut the presumption raised by the plaintiff.

Therefore as the plaintiff has adduced evidence on his behalf to prove his contention and as the said contention of the plaintiff stood unrebutted and unchallenged by the defendant, the plaintiff is entitled for recovery of suit amount as prayed for. This point is accordingly answered in favor of the plaintiff.

Page 4 of 4 O.S.No. 106 of 2025

Dt: 25.03.2026

7. POINT No.2.

IN THE RESULT, the suit is decreed with costs for an amount of Rs.1,90,650/- (Rupees One Lakh Ninety Thousand Six Hundred and Fifty only) with subsequent interest @ 12% per annum from the date of suit till the date of decree and @ 6% per annum from the date of decree till the date of realization on the principal amount of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh only).

(Typed to my dictation by the Stenographer, corrected and pronounced by me in the Open Court, on this the 25 th day of March, 2026).

Sd/-

ADDL.JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE

HUZURNAGAR

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

WITNESSES EXAMINED

For Plaintiff:- For Defendant:-

PW-1: Vuppala Rama Krishna Rao---Exparte---

EXHIBITS MARKED

For Plaintiff:

Ex.A1 : Original Promissory Note, dated 09.03.2022.

Ex.A2 : Office copy of Legal Notice, dated 03.03.2025

Ex.A3 : Postal Receipt, dated 06.03.2025

For Defendant:

--Nil--

Sd/-

ADDL.JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE

HUZURNAGAR

OS/212/2024

Yeshamulla Sathish vs Budige Hussain

24 Mar 2026

Page 1 of 4 O.S.No. 212 of 2024

Dt: 24.03.2026

IN THE COURT OF ADDL.JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT HUZURNAGAR

Dated this the 24th day of March, 2026

Present: Smt. Shaik Ayesha Sareen,

Addl. Junior Civil Judge, Huzurnagar.

O.S.No. 212 of 2024

Between: Yeshamulla Sathish, S/o. Babu, Aged about 34 years, Occ: Agriculture, R/o. Mukundapuram Village, Nereducherla Mandal, Suryapet district. …Plaintiff

And

Budige Hussain, S/o. Venkanna, Aged about 34 years, Occ: Agriculture, R/o. Kalluru Village, Nereducherla Mandal, Suryapet District. …Defendant

This suit is coming up before me on 12.03.2026 for final hearing in the presence of Sri. M. Vagya Naik, Advocate for the Plaintiff and defendant remained Exparte; upon perusing the material on record and after hearing the arguments, this Court made the following:-

J U D G M E N T

1.The plaintiff filed this suit for recovery of an amount of

Rs.88,480/- (Rupees Eighty Eight Thousand Four Hundred and Eighty only) being the principal and subsequent interest with following averments.

2. That the plaintiff and defendant are well acquainted with each other, out of said acquaintance on 20.01.2022 the defendant borrowed an amount of Rs.56,000/- (Rupees Fifty Six Thousand only) from the plaintiff for his family needs and on the same day the defendant executed suit promissory note at Mukundapuram Village,

Page 2 of 4 O.S.No. 212 of 2024

Dt: 24.03.2026

Nereducherla Mandal, Suryapet district in favor of plaintiff agreeing to repay the same along with interest of Rs.2/- per one hundred either to plaintiff or to his order on demand. Thereafter the plaintiff made several demands with the defendant to repay the amount due under the promissory note with the interest but the defendant postponed the same on one pretext or the other and intentionally avoiding to repay the amount; as such the plaintiff was constrained to file this suit.

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

5. Now the points for consideration are:

1) Whether the plaintiff is entitled for recovery of the suit amount as prayed for?

2) To what relief?

6. POINT No.1

Page 3 of 4 O.S.No. 212 of 2024

Dt: 24.03.2026

plaintiff has discharged his burden by adducing evidence on his behalf and by marking Ex.A1 which is suit Promissory note, dated 20.01.2022, Ex.A2 which is office copy of Legal Notice, dated 09.01.2024. Hence the plaintiff is benefited by the statutory presumption under section 118(a) of Negotiable Instruments Act, that the suit promissory note is supported by consideration. On the other hand, the defendant did not appear before this court to contest the suit on merits and to rebut the presumption raised by the plaintiff. Therefore as the plaintiff has adduced evidence on her behalf to prove her contention and as the said contention of the plaintiff stood unrebutted and unchallenged by the defendant, the plaintiff has proved his contention. This point is accordingly answered in favour of the plaintiff.

POINT No.2.

IN THE RESULT, the suit is decreed with costs for an amount of Rs.88,480/- (Rupees Eighty Eight Thousand Four Hundred and

Eighty only) with subsequent interest @ 12% per annum from the date of suit till the date of decree and @ 6% per annum from the date of decree till the date of realization on the principal amount of Rs.56,000/- (Rupees Fifty Six Thousand only).

(Typed to my dictation by the Stenographer, corrected and pronounced by me in the Open Court, on this the 24 th day of March, 2026).

Sd/-

ADDL.JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE

HUZURNAGAR

Page 4 of 4 O.S.No. 212 of 2024

Dt: 24.03.2026

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

WITNESSES EXAMINED

For Plaintiff:- For Defendants:-

PW-1: Yeshamulla Sathish---Exparte---

EXHIBITS MARKED

For Plaintiff:

Ex.A1 : Original Promissory Note, dated: 20.01.2022

Ex.A2 : Office copy of Legal Notice, dated 09.01.2024

For Defendant: --Nil--

Sd/-

ADDL.JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE

HUZURNAGAR

Order Record 132 total

Case No.	Parties	Date	Type	Outcome
OS/106/2025	Vuppala Rama Krishna Rao vs Kothuru Venkateswarlu	25 Mar 2026	Judgement	—
OS/171/2025	Bapanapally Rajeswari vs Jakkali Srinivas	25 Mar 2026	Judgement	—
OS/212/2024	Yeshamulla Sathish vs Budige Hussain	24 Mar 2026	Judgement	—
OS/263/2024	Gurram Sandeep Reddy vs Kodumuri Veera Reddy	24 Mar 2026	Judgement	—
OS/331/2025	JANGA GANGADHAR RAO vs SHAIK HAFEEZ	24 Mar 2026	Judgement	—
OS/136/2025	Pentapalli Ajay vs Gundepangu Saidulu	23 Mar 2026	Judgement	—
OS/105/2025	Bhukya Nagamani vs Sabavath Sadar	10 Mar 2026	Judgement	—
OS/122/2025	Sathuluri Madhava Rao vs Pandiripalli Shambhi Reddy	10 Mar 2026	Judgement	—
OS/63/2025	Muthineni Mallaiah vs Pillutla Narsimha Rao	06 Mar 2026	Judgement	—
CC/1139/2021	SHO CHINTHALAPALEM vs R Prasad	02 Mar 2026	Judgement	—
CC/1452/2021	sho Mellacheruvu vs Bukya Shoban babu	17 Feb 2026	Judgement	—
OS/144/2025	Nandipati Ansuryamma vs Amararapu Kanakaiah	10 Feb 2026	Judgement	—
CC/1879/2021	STATE OF TELANGANA vs POTHURAJU MADHU	10 Feb 2026	Judgement	—
OS/175/2025	Challa Venkata Reddy vs Bachalakuri Eliya	05 Feb 2026	Judgement	—
OS/72/2025	Shaik Masthan vs Nimmala Sathyanarayana	04 Feb 2026	Judgement	—
OS/108/2025	Bhukya Nagaraju vs Amgothu Thirupathamma	04 Feb 2026	Judgement	—
OS/242/2024	Deshmukh Divya Jyothi vs Mandava Ramesh	04 Feb 2026	Judgement	—
OS/170/2025	Devaram Kiran Reddy vs Mellacheruvu Saidulu	03 Feb 2026	Judgement	—
CC/1487/2021	Sho mellacheruvu vs B jagan	03 Feb 2026	Judgement	—
CC/1467/2021	SHo mellacheruvu vs Vemula Bhixamreddy	30 Jan 2026	Judgement	—
CC/1627/2021	SHo Mellacheruvu vs I Bichya	30 Jan 2026	Judgement	—
OS/96/2025	Gugulothu Ashok Kumar vs Gugulothu Vijaya	29 Jan 2026	Judgement	—
OS/318/2024	Bhukya Sujatha vs Cherukuri Kotaiah	29 Jan 2026	Judgement	—
CC/461/2016	G NAGESHWARA RAO vs D BALAJI	29 Jan 2026	Judgement	—
CC/339/2015	K RAHELU vs D PRAVEEN	28 Jan 2026	Judgement	—
CC/862/2021	SHO MELLACGHERUVU vs U bhagyaraju	28 Jan 2026	Judgement	—
CC/1079/2021	SHO CHINTHALAPALEM vs GBhaskar	28 Jan 2026	Judgement	—
OS/271/2024	Yaragorla Saidaiah vs Yaragorla Gangamma	27 Jan 2026	Judgement	—
OS/459/2024	Donthagani Srinu vs Chinthalapati Saidulu	23 Jan 2026	Judgement	—
CC/684/2016	P.NAGESHWARI vs N.CHITTI BABU AND OTHERS	23 Jan 2026	Judgement	—
OS/116/2024	Oruganti Narsimha Rao vs Mood Nageshwar Rao	22 Jan 2026	Judgement	—
CC/908/2021	SHO CHINTHALAPALEM vs A magda	21 Jan 2026	Judgement	—
CC/913/2021	SHO CHINTHALAPALEM vs G Venkatesh	21 Jan 2026	Judgement	—
OS/312/2024	Vusthela Srinivas Reddy vs Karnati Shambi Reddy	20 Jan 2026	Judgement	—
PRC/30/2024	STATE OF TELANGANA vs Prasad Sattu	19 Jan 2026	Order	—
CC/1414/2021	SHo Mellacheruvu vs Vsbanvath Chilaka	07 Jan 2026	Judgement	—
PRC/4/2023	STATE OF TELANGANA vs Boyaboina Sai Kumar	06 Jan 2026	Order	—
OS/245/2024	Ramavath Balu Naik vs Ajmeera Babu	30 Dec 2025	Judgement	—
CC/924/2021	SHO CHINTHALAPALEM vs A veeramma	24 Dec 2025	Judgement	—
CC/1887/2021	SHO Mellachervu vs PRATHIPATI SRINIVASA REDDY	24 Dec 2025	Judgement	—
PRC/43/2021	THE SHO PS MELLACHERVU vs THAMMISETTY VEERA LAXMI AND OTHERS	24 Dec 2025	Order	—
CC/292/2014	M PADMA vs B UPENDER	23 Dec 2025	Judgement	—
CC/909/2021	SHO CHINTHALAPALEM vs Karigula Srinu	23 Dec 2025	Judgement	—
CC/1158/2021	SHO CHINTHALAPALEM vs R veeraiah	23 Dec 2025	Judgement	—
PRC/15/2023	STATE OF TELANGANA vs Naveen Sapavath	23 Dec 2025	Order	—
PRC/26/2022	STATE OF TELANGANA vs Bobba Madhavi	23 Dec 2025	Order	—
CC/176/2024	STATE OF TELANGANA vs Kalyan Gugulothu	19 Dec 2025	Judgement	—
CC/844/2021	SHO CHINTHALAPALEM vs GUGULOTHU Balaji	19 Dec 2025	Judgement	—
CC/1012/2021	SHO CHINTHALAPALEM vs D veeraswamy	19 Dec 2025	Judgement	—
CC/961/2021	SHO CHINTHALAPALEM vs A Krishna	18 Dec 2025	Judgement	—
CC/382/2022	STATE OF TELANGANA vs Mohmad Khasimjan	17 Dec 2025	Judgement	—
CC/881/2021	SHo Chinthlapalem vs T venkateswarlu	17 Dec 2025	Judgement	—
CC/1067/2021	SHO CHINTHALAPALEM vs Thota Saidulu	17 Dec 2025	Judgement	—
OS/67/2024	Malgireddy Akki Reddy vs Mende Nagamma	16 Dec 2025	Judgement	—
CC/1046/2017	B.YADAVENDRA REDDY vs M.BUDDA AND OTHERS	16 Dec 2025	Judgement	—
PRC/3/2021	STATE OF TELANGANA vs Kothapally Prabhu	16 Dec 2025	Order	—
CC/548/2024	STATE OF TELANGANA vs Shailaja thuraga	09 Dec 2025	Judgement	—
CC/678/2020	Banoth Mounika vs Bhukya Suresh	05 Dec 2025	Judgement	—
CC/857/2015	G KRISHNA vs M RAMA RAO	05 Dec 2025	Judgement	—
CC/152/2015	D MANJU vs D DARMA AND OTHERS	04 Dec 2025	Judgement	—
CC/647/2016	g upendra vs Vsv saidamma	04 Dec 2025	Judgement	—
OS/21/2025	Shaik Kudan Saheb vs Shaik Dasthagiri Vali	02 Dec 2025	Judgement	—
OS/23/2025	Rama Prabhakar vs Kommu Venkateshwarlu	02 Dec 2025	Judgement	—
OS/460/2024	Panuganti Nagender Rao vs Chinthalapatii Saidulu	02 Dec 2025	Judgement	—
PRC/9/2022	STATE OF TELANGANA vs Vsbanavath nageswar rao	01 Dec 2025	Order	—
CC/1301/2021	SHO CHINTHALAPALEM PS vs Pittala Raju	28 Nov 2025	Judgement	—
PRC/34/2021	SHO CHINTHALAPALEM vs GADDAM nARSIREDDY AND OTHERS	25 Nov 2025	Order	—
PRC/37/2021	S.H.O PS CHINTHALAPALEM vs BHUKYA RAVINDER	25 Nov 2025	Order	—
PRC/17/2024	SHO Mattampally vs Shaik Regulagadda Shareef and (3) others	24 Nov 2025	Order	—
CC/1027/2021	SHO CHINTHALAPALEM vs Lenkamma	21 Nov 2025	Judgement	—
CC/243/2015	narisreddy vs Vssk nagulmera	20 Nov 2025	Judgement	—
CC/825/2021	SHO CHINTHALAPALEM vs Vsakula Anjaiah	20 Nov 2025	Judgement	—
OS/2/2024	Cheruku Kiran vs Kotha Shankar	19 Nov 2025	Judgement	—
OS/133/2025	Pradhani Saidulu vs Nerella Narasimha	18 Nov 2025	Judgement	—
CC/232/2015	B RAMA KRISHNA vs M NAGAIAH	18 Nov 2025	Judgement	—
CC/1020/2021	SHO CHINTHALAPALEM vs K venakaiah	14 Nov 2025	Judgement	—
CC/836/2021	SHO CHINTHALAPALEM vs MAMIDI NAGESWAR RAO	13 Nov 2025	Judgement	—
CC/962/2021	SHO CHINTHALAPALEM vs D hanumanthu	13 Nov 2025	Judgement	—
CC/1052/2021	SHO CHINTHALAPALEM vs U Shiva	13 Nov 2025	Judgement	—
OS/221/2025	BODHA NARSI REDDY vs SHIAK SHABEER	11 Nov 2025	Judgement	—
OS/319/2024	Banothu Venkateshwarlu vs Banothu Alivalu	10 Nov 2025	Judgement	—
OS/282/2024	Canara Bank, Branch. Kalmalcheruvu rep. by its Manager V. Rajashekar Reddy vs Bommanaboina Madhavi	04 Nov 2025	Judgement	—
CC/362/2022	STATE OF TELANGANA vs Todeti Madhu	04 Nov 2025	Judgement	—
CC/832/2021	SHO CHINTHALAPALEM vs K Peda Pullaiah	04 Nov 2025	Judgement	—
CC/1756/2021	THE SHO PS MELLACHERVU vs JANGILI SHIVA KUMAR @ SHAMBAIAH AND OTHERS	04 Nov 2025	Judgement	—
OS/264/2024	Inugurthi Srinivasa Chary vs Payala Anji @ Anjaneyulu	03 Nov 2025	Judgement	—
CC/807/2021	SHO CHINTHALAPALEM vs KARINGULA SAIDULU	03 Nov 2025	Judgement	—
CC/56/2017	K MERI vs K ASHOK	31 Oct 2025	Judgement	—
OS/98/2025	Banothu Nagya vs Malothu Bhulli	30 Oct 2025	Judgement	—
CC/1066/2021	SHO CHINTHALAPALEM vs B Ramesh babu and others	30 Oct 2025	Judgement	—
OS/143/2024	Thummakomma Prasanna vs Kudithotti Kanthamma	28 Oct 2025	Judgement	—
CC/473/2014	V DILEEP KUMAR vs M NAGUNAIK AND OTHERS	28 Oct 2025	Judgement	—
CC/1106/2016	A.RAMESH vs G.RAJU	28 Oct 2025	Judgement	—
CC/1061/2016	K.P.CHARY vs Vsb pandu	27 Oct 2025	Judgement	—
OS/20/2025	Mamidi Prasad vs Shaik Subani	24 Oct 2025	Judgement	—
CC/346/2018	Boddula venkanna vs Puli Vaasudeva	24 Oct 2025	Judgement	—
CC/977/2022	STATE OF TELANGANA vs Vsdesagani gopaiah	24 Oct 2025	Judgement	—
CC/1029/2021	SHO CHINTHALAPALEM vs A prathap reddy	24 Oct 2025	Judgement	—
OS/223/2025	NANDYALA VIJAYA ALIAS VIJAYA LAKSHMI vs SHAIK GALIBSAHEB	23 Oct 2025	Judgement	—
OS/51/2024	Vattikuti Chiranjeevi vs Bollepally Saidulu	17 Oct 2025	Judgement	—

Showing 100 of 132 orders — Log in to browse all pages.

Monthly Orders (Last 12 Months)

Mar 2026		10
Feb 2026		9
Jan 2026		18
Dec 2025		28
Nov 2025		22
Oct 2025		19
Sep 2025		13
Aug 2025		12
Jul 2025		1

Frequently Asked Questions

How many cases has SHAIK AYESHA SAREEN handled?

SHAIK AYESHA SAREEN has handled 132 court orders since 2025 at Huzurnagar, ADJ Court Complex. The average disposal rate is 13 orders per month.

What types of cases does SHAIK AYESHA SAREEN hear?

Based on available records, SHAIK AYESHA SAREEN primarily handles Criminal matters (Criminal Cases) and Civil matters (Original Suits) at Huzurnagar, ADJ Court Complex.

Where is SHAIK AYESHA SAREEN currently posted?

SHAIK AYESHA SAREEN is posted as Junior Civil Judge at Huzurnagar, ADJ Court Complex, Suryapet, Telangana.

Are judgments by SHAIK AYESHA SAREEN available online?

Yes. 5 judgments by SHAIK AYESHA SAREEN are available on Legistro with full text, outcome, and sections cited.

How fast does SHAIK AYESHA SAREEN dispose cases?

SHAIK AYESHA SAREEN disposes approximately 13 cases per month, based on 132 orders handled over their tenure at Huzurnagar, ADJ Court Complex.

Since when is SHAIK AYESHA SAREEN serving?

SHAIK AYESHA SAREEN has been serving at Huzurnagar, ADJ Court Complex since 2025.

Case Types

CC 56%

OS 36%

PRC 8%

Posting History

Apr 2026 — May 2026

Junior Civil Judge
Jun 2025 — Present

Addl JudlMagistrate of First Class Huzurnagar · 132 orders

Other Judges at this Court

Ms. Deepa Kasaragadda

Junior Civil Judge

0 orders

Syamasundar Nakka

Senior Civil Judge

9 orders

P.siva Rama Prasad

II Additional District and Sessions Court

7 orders

← View all judges at Huzurnagar, ADJ Court Complex