Currently Serving

Smt. Shaik Faizunnisa

Senior Civil Judge, Proddatur

II Additional District Judge Court, Proddatur (Taluka) · Kadapa · Andhra Pradesh

Smt. Shaik Faizunnisa, Senior Civil Judge, Proddatur, is posted at II Additional District Judge Court, Proddatur (Taluka), Kadapa, Andhra Pradesh, India. 515 court orders on record since 2025. 5 judgments with full text available. Primarily handles H, OS, SC cases.

515

Total Orders

Judgments

Orders/Month

Posting

Featured Judgments

IP/49/2024

Vempalli Salanna vs Pothula Veera Sekhar

07 May 2026

IP No.49 of 2024 1 S.C.J Court, Pdtr. dt.07.05.2026

APKD040003332024

IN THE COURT OF SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE :: PRODDATUR

Present:- Smt. Sk.Faizunnisa,

Senior Civil Judge, Proddatur

Thursday, this the 07th day of May, 2026

I.P.No.49 of 2024

Between:

Vempalli Salanna, S/o Peeru Sab, aged about 56 years, agriculturist cum lorry driver, residing at D.No.1-31-A, Alladupalli village, Chapadu Mandal, Kadapa District. …. Petitioner.

And.

1. Pothula Veera Sekhar, S/o Veeraiah, aged about 50 years, driver, residing at Alladupalli village, Chapadu Mandal, Kadapa District.

2. Udipi Venkgamma, W/o Lakshmaiah, aged about 70 years, coolie, residing at G.V.Satram, Mydukur Mandal, Kadapa District.

3. Mogili Sreenivasulu, S/o Lakshmaiah, aged about 60 years, coolie, residing at Sreeramulapeta village, Chapadu Mandal, Kadapa District.

4. Asa Sujatha, W/o Sreenivasulu, aged about 40 years, housewife, residing at Sreeramulapeta village, Chapadu mandal, Kadapa District.

5. Palagiri Renuka Vana Jyothsana, W/o late Veera Mohan Reddy, aged about 50 years, housewife, residing at Alladupalli village, Chapadu Mandal, Kadapa District.

6. Meegada Swapna, W/o Hanumantha Reddy, aged about 40 years, housewife, residing at Sreeramulapeta village, Chapadu mandal, Kadapa District.

7. Mokshagundam Bolla Gurivi Reddy, S/o Gurivi Reddy, aged about 70 years, agriculturist, residing at Alladupalli village, Chapadu Mandal, Kadapa District.

8. Kurava Gowramma, W/o Basanna, aged about 55 years, housewife, residing at D.No.250-LIGH, Park road, near Mahira fashion ladies tailor, housing board colony, Proddatur town and mandal, Kadapa District.

9. Gosula Veera Reddy, S/o Subba Reddy, aged about 75 years, agriculturist, residing at Alladupalli village, Chapadu mandal, Kadapa District.

10. Dasreddy Raja Reddy, S/o Subba Reddy, aged about 55 years, agriculturist, residing at Balaji Nagar-II, Proddatur town and Mandal, Kadapa District.

11. Pasupula Veera Raja Sekhar, S/o Pedda Rachaiah, aged about 40 years, business, residing at near Janda Chettu, Alladupalli village,

IP No.49 of 2024 2 S.C.J Court, Pdtr. dt.07.05.2026

Chapadu Mandal, Kadapa District.

12. Velthurla Khader Basha, S/o Chinna Hyder Sab, aged about 45 years, business, residing at Vadlavandlapalli village, Gangayapalli post, Pendlimarri Mandal Kadapa District.

13. Shaik Munni, W/o lade Mabu Valli, aged about 45 years, housewife, residing at new buildings, Alladupalli village, Chapadu Mandal, Kadapa District.

14. Nallaballi Obulamma, W/o Veeraiah, aged about 48 years, dhobi, residing at Alladupalli village, Chapadu mandal, Kadapa District.

15. Nallaballi Madhusudhan, S/o Ramaiah, aged about 45 years, cultivation, residing at Alladupalli village, Chapadu mandal, Kadapa District.

16. Gosula Venkata Subba Reddy (Uday), S/o Yella Reddy, aged about 50 years, agriculturist, residing at Alladupalli village, Chapadu Mandal, Kadapa District.

17. Chennur Jaffar, S/o late Kamal Basha, aged about 30 years, goldsmith, residing at Alladupalli village, Chapadu Mandal, Kadapa District.

18. M.Naga Dasthagiri, S/o Parvathi, aged about 30 years, Mechanic, residing at Lakshmi Narayanapeta, near Obulareddypeta, Chapadu Mandal, Kadapa District.

19. Gosula Veera Reddy, S/o Bali Reddy, aged about 50 years, agriculturist, residing at Alladupalli village, Chapadu Mandal, Kadapa District.

20. Shaik Beebi, W/o late Gaffer, aged about 50 years, housewife, residing at Alladupalli village, Chapadu Mandal, Kadapa District.

21. Yarasi Vijaya Kumar Reddy, S/o Rama Chandra Reddy, aged about 50 years, teacher, residing at Sreeramulapeta village, Chapadu Mandal, Kadapa District.

22. Lenkala Venkateshu, S/o Varadaiah, aged about 50 years, milk business, residing at Sreeramulapeta village, Chapadu Mandal, Kadapa District.

23. Aluru Khairun, W/o Sanjeeva Rayudu @ Bangaru Sanjeevarayudu, aged about 45 years, housewife, residing at Alladupalli village, Chapadu Mandal, Kadapa District.

24. Nallabothula Lakshmi Narayana, S/o Purushotham, aged about 60 years, agriculturist, residing at Alladupalli village, Chapadu Mandal, Kadapa District.

25. Naguru Sudhakar, S/o Subbarayudu, aged about 45 years, agriculturist, residing at Obulareddypeta village, Chapadu Mandal, Kadapa District.

26. Balayapalli Sreenivasulu, S/o late Pedda Veeranna, aged about 40 years, auto driver, residing at Alladupalli village, Chapadu Mandal, Kadapa District.

27. Balayapalli Anjaneyulu, S/o late Pedda Veeranna, aged about 45 years, auto driver, residing at Alladupalli village, Chapadu Mandal, Kadapa District.

28. Gosula Kishore Kumar Reddy, S/o Narayana Reddy, aged about 35 years, Surpanch, residing at Alladupalli village, Chapadu Mandal, Kadapa District.

....Respondents.

IP No.49 of 2024 3 S.C.J Court, Pdtr. dt.07.05.2026

This petition is coming on 07.05.2026 for final hearing before me in the presence of Sri. K.Masthanaiah, Advocate for the petitioner and of the respondents remained exparate and having stood over for consideration till this day, this court delivered the following:-

O R D E R

1.This petition filed by the petitioner against the respondents u/Sec.10 and 13 of the Provincial Insolvency Act, 1920 to adjudicate the petitioner as an insolvent.

2.The brief averments of the petition are as follows:-

The petitioner is an agriculturist and he is doing cultivation by taking lands on lease from other landlords. To cultivate lands and other agricultural operations he borrowed money from some respondents since 9 years. He sustained heavy loss in cultivation due to failure of crops for the past 5 years.

Respondents demanded him to discharge their debts with high interest and forcibly obtained promissory notes.

He submitted that due to failure of agriculture he is acting as lorry driver to discharge his debts. He sought time from the respondents for grant of more time to discharge their debts, but the respondents did not heed his request and they are putting pressure and threatened him to discharge their debts. As he is unable to discharge their debts due to pressure and threats of the respondents, as he is suffering from physical and mental agony and as such he filed this petition.

Further he shown A – schedule liabilities by describing his debts to the respondents for an amount of Rs.25,64,000/- and whereas B – schedule assets shown as Nil. As per C – Schedule the debts of him as there are no assets.

Hence, he approached the Hon’ble court to adjudge him as an insolvent.

3.In spite of service of notice, the respondents No.1 to 28 did not

IP No.49 of 2024 4 S.C.J Court, Pdtr. dt.07.05.2026 appear before the court and as such they remained set exparte.

4. To prove the case of petitioner, the petitioner himself examined as

PW.1 and no documents are marked.

5. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the record.

6. Now the point for consideration is :

Whether the petitioner is entitled to adjudicated as an insolvent

as prayed for?

7.Point:

To prove his case, the petitioner himself examined as PW.1 and he reiterated the contents of his petition in his chief affidavit. As per the testimony of

PW.1 he is agriculturist, doing cultivation by taking land on lease from other landlords. To cultivate land he borrowed money from respondents with high rate of interest. Due to failure of crops from the past 5 years he sustained heavy loss.

Respondents demanded him to discharge his debts with high interest which were borrowed by him under promissory notes.

He requested the respondents to grant some time to discharge their debts but they did not heed his request, pressurized him and threatened him to discharge their debts, quarreled with his family and abused them in filthy language and forcibly to discharge their debts. Hence, he filed this petition.

9.Further he shown A – schedule property by describing his debts to the respondents for an amount of Rs.25,64,000/- and whereas B – schedule property show as Nil. C – Schedule is the debts of him which far exceeds his assets as his assets shown as nil.

10.The evidence of PW.1 clearly proves that PW.1 is unable to pay the debts described in A – schedule his debts are more than the worth of petition B – schedule assets. Further the respondents for the reasons best known to them did

IP No.49 of 2024 5 S.C.J Court, Pdtr. dt.07.05.2026 not appear before the court and thereby they remained exparte. The respondents did not choose to contest the matter by raising any objection against the claim of the petitioner.

11.As seen from the provisions under section 10 of the Provincial

Insolvency Act, 1920 when the debts of the debtor are more than Rs.500/- and when the debtor is unable to discharge the same, he may apply to be adjudged as an insolvent. Further as per the provisions of Provincial Insolvency Act the court is required to conduct only summary enquiry and as such the petitioner has to lead prima facie evidence about his genuineness of his debts and his incapacity in discharging the debts.

12.As seen from the evidence of PW.1 he claims that he is an agriculturist doing cultivation by taking land on lease from other landlords. For cultivation he borrowed huge amounts from the respondents and he sustained heavy loss due to failure of crops. Thereafter, due to financial crisis he could not discharge the debts of the creditors.

13.As already stated supra, the respondents for the reasons best known to them did not appear before the court and thereby they remained exparte. The respondents did not choose to contest the matter and did not raise any objection against the claim of the petitioner.

14.The evidence of PW.1 is left unchallenged and it clearly proves that he has no assets to discharge the A – schedule debts. As per the Provincial

Insolvency Act the petitioner has to establish prima facie that he is unable to pay his debts. The evidence on record proved that the petitioner committed the act of insolvency and as such he is entitled to be declared as Insolvent as prayed for.

Accordingly, this point is answered in favour of petitioner and against the respondents.

IP No.49 of 2024 6 S.C.J Court, Pdtr. dt.07.05.2026

15.In the result, this Insolvency petition is allowed adjudicating the petitioner as Insolvent. Publish in official Gazette. The properties of insolvent shall vest with the Official Receiver for administration. The petitioner is directed to file discharge petition within three months. Under the facts and circumstances of the case, both parties shall bear their own costs.

Directly typed by the Stenographer Gr.III, corrected and pronounced by me in the open court, this the 07th day of May, 2026.

Sd/- Sk.Faizunnisa,

Senior Civil Judge,

Proddatur.

Appendix of evidence

Witnesses examined for

Petitioner: Respondents:

PW.1: Vempalli Salanna - Exparte -

Exhibits marked for

Petitioner: Respondents:

- Nil -- Nil -

Id/- Sk.F.,

SCJ, PDTR.

OS/60/2024

T. Vijay Kumar Reddy vs G. Venkata Lakshumma

07 May 2026

O.S.No.60 of 2024 1 Seniro Civil Judge’s Court, Proddatur, dt. 07.05.2026.

APKD040004442024

IN THE COURT OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE’S COURT :: PRODDATUR

Present : Smt. Sk.Faizunnisa,

Senior Civil Judge, Proddatur

Thursday, this the 07th day of May, 2026.

Original Suit No. 60 of 2024

Between

1. T.Vijya Kumar Reddy, S/o Thupakula Subba Reddy, aged about 37 years, Business, resident of D.No.2/60, Lingapuram village, Proddatur Mandal, Kadapa District.

2. K.Srinivasulu, S/o Korrapati Pullaiah, aged about 38 years, Agriculture, resident of D.No.1/172, Pallavaolu village, Proddatur Mandal, Kadapa District. . . . Plaintiffs

Vs.

1. G.Venkata Lakshumma, W/o Govindu Ramaiah, aged about 70 years, Business, resident of Urutur village, Veerapunayanipalle Mandal, Kadapa District.

2. K.Obula Reddy, S/o Kallur Lakshmi Reddy, aged about 72 years, Business, resident of Urutur village, Veerapunayanipalle Mandal, Kadapa District. . . . Defendants

This suit coming on this day for disposal before me in the presence of

Sri.D.Madhu Reddy, Counsel for plaintiff and of defendants are set exparte and upon perusing the record, after hearing on plaintifff’s side, and having stood over for consideration till this day this court delivered the following :

: : JUDGMENT : :

1.This is a suit filed by the plaintiffs to execute a regular registered sale deed in favour of the plaintiffs covering the petition schedule properties by the defendants and declare the registered sale deeds No.5217/2023 & 5218/2023

dated 23.11.2023 as null and void. Hence, the suit.

O.S.No.60 of 2024 2 Seniro Civil Judge’s Court, Proddatur, dt. 07.05.2026.

S C H E D U L E

Item No.1

YSR Kadapa district, Kamalapuram Sub-Register, Veerapunayanipalle

Mandal, uruturu village fields, single plot bearing Survey No.471/A with an extent of Ac.1.73 cents and Survey No.472/A with an extent of Ac.1.70 cents out of

Ac.5.20 cents of a total of Ac.3.43 cents of Agricultural land as one piece with below mentioned boundries:

East :Road.

West :Land of Kadasani Bali Reddy.

North :Land of Kambham Malla Reddy.

South:Land of Yerra Pullaiah.

Item No.2

YSR Kadapa district, Kamalapuram Sub-Register, Veerapunayanipalle

Mandal, uruturu village fields, single plot bearing Survey No.468 with an extent of

Ac.3.00 cents out of Ac.5.20 cents of a total of Ac.8.82 cents of Agricultural land as one piece with below mentioned boundries:

East :Land of S.Ramanjaneya Reddy.

West :Land of V.Nirmalamma.

North :Rastha.

South:Land of G.Krishna Thulasi.

2.Affidavit evidence of PW1 filed. Ex.A1 to Ex.A10 marked.

3.Heard. The defendants are set exparte already.

4.Perused the evidence of plaintiff No.1 himself examined as PW1 and

Ex.A1 to A10 are marked. He stated that first defendant approached them and claimed that the properties listed in the plaint scheduel were the sole inheritance from her husband Govinda Ramaiah. They agreed to purchase the properties which consists of Ac.6.43 cents of agricultural land and the sale price was set at

Rs.3,50,000/- per acre and the total sale amount is Rs.22,50,500/-. On

O.S.No.60 of 2024 3 Seniro Civil Judge’s Court, Proddatur, dt. 07.05.2026.

20.01.2022 the first defendant received 1/4th of the total amount i.e., Rs.6,00,000/- as an advance payment and the agreement was drafted and executed by the first defendant in their favour.

5.On 01.05.2022 the first defendant received Rs.5,00,000/- towards slae consideration and it was endorsed on the back side of the sale agreement in the presence of witness. Again on 15.08.2022 the first defendant received an amount of Rs.5,00,000/- towards sale consideration and it was endorsed on the back side of the sale agreement infront of the witness.

6.Finally, on 12.01.2023 the first defendant received an amount of

Rs.6,50,500/- as the remaining balance of the sale consideration and delivered the relevant documents for the properties listed in the plaint and acknowledged the transaction on the back side of the sale agreement in the presence of witness.

7.He fruther stated that the first defendant received the entire sale consideration of Rs.22,50,500/- from them, but the first defendant legally obligated to transfer the suit properties to them. Leagal notice is issued on 25.02.2024 to the first defendant and she was called upon 05.03.2024 but she failed to appear before Sub Registrar Office, Kamalapuram.

8.The defendant No.2 and 3 fraudulently created the nominal registered documents 5217/2023 and 5218/2023, dated 23.11.023 with an intention to undermining their lawful rights. The defendant No.2 and 3 are fully aware of the agreement executed by the first defendant in their favour on 20.01.2022. Due to personal gain defendant No.2 and 3 colluded with first defendant and created the above documents.

9.The plaintiff No.2 examined as PW.2 and he reiterated the contents of PW.1. Hence, this suit is filed to execute regular registered sale deed in favour

O.S.No.60 of 2024 4 Seniro Civil Judge’s Court, Proddatur, dt. 07.05.2026.

of plaintiffs and to declare the registered sale deeds No.5217/2023 & 5218/2023

dated 23.11.2023 as null and void. The evidence of plaintiff / P.W.1 is left

unchallenged. Therefore, plaintiff could substantiate its case.

5.In the result, the suit is decreed with costs directing the first defendant to execute a regular registered sale deed in favour of plaintiffs within three months from this date failing which plaintiffs are at liberty to proceed as per law.

Typed to my dication by the Stenographer Grade III, on computer, corrected and

pronounced by me in the open court, this the 07th day of May, 2026.

SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE,

PRODDATUR.

Appendix of Evidence

Witnesses Examined

For Plaintiff :

P.W.1: T.Vijaya Kumar Reddy.

PW.2: K.Srinivasulu.

For defendants : None

EXHIBITS MARKED

For Plaintiff :

Ex.A1: Original sale agreement, dated 20.01.2022.

Ex.A2: Office copy of legal notice dated 25.02.2024 issued to defendant No.1.

Ex.A3: Served acknowledgment issued by the Proddatur Postal Superintendent.

Ex.A4: Original registered sale deed No.791/1967, dated 20.05.1967.

Ex.A5: Original registered sale deed No.843/1967, dated 05.06.1967.

Ex.A6: Original registered sale deed No.213/1945, dated 14.03.1945.

Ex.A7: Copies No.1, Aadangal/Pahani pertaining to Sy.No.471-A & 472-A, dated 05.09.2022.

Ex.A8: Original unregistered sale deed, dated 05.03.2024.

Ex.A9: Certified copy of registered sale deed No.5217/2023, dated 23.11.2023.

Ex.A10: Certified copy of registered sale deed No.5218/2023, dated 23.11.2023.

For Defendants : Nil.

SCJ, PDTR.

H.M.O.P/113/2025

Yarasi Viswaanathareddy vs Vsnil

08 May 2026

Date: 08.05.2026 1 HMOP.113/2025

APKD040002792025

IN THE COURT OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE’S COURT :: PRODDATUR

Present : Smt. Sk.Faizunnisa,

Senior Civil Judge, Proddatur

Friday, this the 08th day of May, 2026.

H.M.O.P. No.113 of 2025

Between

1. Yarasi Viswanatha Reddy

2. Gopireddy Lahari @ Yerasi Lahari … Petitioners.

And

Nil. … Respondent.

This petition has come up before me on 08.05.2026 for final hearing in the presence of Sri. M.Chandra Sekhar Reddy, learned counsel for the Petitioners, and the respondent shown as Nil, upon perusing the material available on record, and having been stood over for consideration till this day, this court made the following:

O R D E R

This petition is filed by the petitioners under section 13 (B) of Hindu

Marriage Act, 1955 seeking for dissolution of their marriage solemnized on 20.04.2024 by mutual consent.

2.The brief averments of the petition are as follows :

i)The 1st petitioner is the legally wedded husband of 2nd petitioner and their marriage was solemnized on 20.04.2024 at Sri Sanjeevarayaswamy

Kalyana Mandapam, Vellala, Rajupalem mandal, Kadapa District in the presence of elders of both sides as per the Hindu rites and customs. At the time of marriage her parents presented 10 thulas of gold to him. After marriage she joined him to lead marital life. Unfortunately, disputes arose between petitioners. Both the petitioners are living separately from 25.06.2024.

Date: 08.05.2026 2 HMOP.113/2025

ii)The efforts of parents and elders of the both sides tried their best for reunion and continue marital relationship but in vain. Finally, during panchayath held by the parents of the petitioners and elders, 1st petitioner agreed to give an amount of Rs.12,00,000/- and 5 thulas of gold to her towards permanent alimony and she received the same and both the petitioners decided to dissolve their marriage by mutual consent. They have agreed not to file any cases hereafter against each other. They voluntarily agreed to dissolve their marriage and there is no any kind of force or undue influence from anyone. Hence this petition seeking the dissolution of their marriage by mutual consent.

3.It appears from the record this petition was filed on 27.06.2025 and the same was registered on 11.07.2025. Both the parties appeared before this

Court and expressed their dislike to lead conjugal life. The reconciliation between them also failed.

4.During the course of enquiry, the 1st petitioner got examined himself as PW.1 and the 2nd petitioner as PW.2. Ex.P1 to Ex.P3 are got marked.

5.Now the point for consideration is:

“Whether the petitioners are entitled for decree of Divorce Dissolving their marriage solemnized on 20.04.2024 by mutual consent as prayed for?”

6.POINT: To prove their case,the petitioners examined as PWs.1 and 2 and they reiterated the contents of the petition and got marked Exs.P1 to

Ex.P3. According to evidence of PW.1 his marriage was performed with 2nd petitioner on 20.04.2024 at Sri Sanjeevarayaswamy Kalyana Mandapam,

Vellala, Rajupalem mandal, Kadapa District in the presence of elders of both sides as per the Hindu rites and customs. Thereafter, some disputes and differences arouse in between the petitioners and they are unable to live together due to their differences. Both the petitioners are living separately since 25.06.2024. The efforts of elders of both sides failed as they are not interested to lead marital life and decided to take divorce to lead independent life as per their will and wish.

7.Further she stated that, 1st petitioner agreed to give an amount of

Date: 08.05.2026 3 HMOP.113/2025

Rs.12,00,000/- and 5 thulas of gold to her towards permanent alimony and she received the same. They agreed not to file any cases against each other in future. Therefore, as there was no possibility for reunion, they filed this petition for dissolving their marriage by mutual consent.

8.PW.2 who is the 2nd petitioner also stated on the same lines as that of

PW.1 and stated that there is no chance of reunion and efforts of counseling were also proved futile and both decided to take divorce on mutual consent.

9.To prove their contention PW.1 relied upon Ex.P1 to Ex.P3 where in

Ex.P1 is the positive marriage photograph of petitioners. Ex.P2 is the original wedding card of petitioners. Ex.P3 is the certificate attested by the Gazetted

Officer with regard to marriage.

10.Inspite of granting six months time for the parties, they did not wish to live together and they intend to take divorce on mutual consent. It appears from the evidence of PW.1 and PW.2 that the petitioners filed the present petition with mutual consent and out of their own accord and it is voluntary.

Hence, the petitioners are entitled for divorce by mutual consent as prayed for. Accordingly, this point is answered in favour of the petitioners.

11.In the result, the petition is allowed without cost and the

marriage of the petitioners solemnized on 20.04.2024 is hereby

dissolved by granting decree of divorce on mutual consent.

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

pronounced by me in the open Court, on this the 08 th day of May, 2026.

Sd/- Smt. Sk.Faizunnisa,

SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE,

PRODDATUR

Date: 08.05.2026 4 HMOP.113/2025

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

WITNESSES EXAMINED FOR PETITIONER:

P.W.1 : Yarasi Viswanatha Reddy

P.W.2 : Gopireddy Lahari @ Yerasi Lahari

WITNESSES EXAMINED FOR RESPONDENT : - None-

EXHIBITS MARKED

For Petitioner:

Ex.P.1 : Positive marriage photograph of petitioners.

Ex.P.2 : Original wedding card of petitioners.

Ex.P.3 : Certificate attested by the Gazetted Officer with regard to marriage.

For Respondent: - Nil -

Id/- S.F.,

S.C.J., PDTR

H.M.O.P/242/2025

Kothapalli Udaya Raju vs Nil

08 May 2026

Date: 08.05.2026 1 HMOP.242/2025

APKD040005672025

IN THE COURT OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE’S COURT :: PRODDATUR

Present : Smt. Sk.Faizunnisa,

Senior Civil Judge, Proddatur

Friday, this the 08th day of May, 2026.

H.M.O.P. No.242 of 2025

Between

1. Kothapalli Udaya Raju

2. Kandula Rupa @ Ruth @ Kothapalli Rupa … Petitioners.

And

Nil. … Respondent.

This petition has come up before me on 08.05.2026 for final hearing in the presence of Sri. B.Sreenivasulu, learned counsel for the Petitioners, and the respondent shown as Nil, upon perusing the material available on record, and having been stood over for consideration till this day, this court made the following:

O R D E R

This petition is filed by the petitioners under section 13 (B) of Hindu

Marriage Act, 1955 seeking for dissolution of their marriage solemnized on 13.10.2024 by mutual consent.

2.The brief averments of the petition are as follows :

i)The 1st petitioner is the legally wedded husband of 2nd petitioner and their marriage was solemnized on 13.10.2024 at his residence at

Thallamapuram village, Proddatur Mandal, Kadapa District in the presence of elders of both sides as per the Hindu rites and customs. After marriage she joined him to lead marital life. The marriage was not consummated.

Unfortunately, disputes arose between petitioners. Both the petitioners are living separately from 15.10.2024.

Date: 08.05.2026 2 HMOP.242/2025

ii)The efforts of parents and elders of the both sides tried their best for reunion and continue marital relationship but in vain. Finally, during panchayath held by the parents of the petitioners and elders, 2nd petitioner agreed not to claim any maintenance towards permanent alimony and both the petitioners decided to dissolve their marriage by mutual consent. They have agreed not to file any cases hereafter against each other. They voluntarily agreed to dissolve their marriage and there is no any kind of force or undue influence from anyone. Hence this petition seeking the dissolution of their marriage by mutual consent.

3.It appears from the record this petition was filed on 16.12.2025 and the same was registered on 20.12.2025. Both the parties appeared before this Court and expressed their dislike to lead conjugal life. The reconciliation between them also failed.

4.During the course of enquiry, the 1st petitioner got examined himself as PW.1 and the 2nd petitioner as PW.2. Ex.P1 to Ex.P4 are got marked.

5.Now the point for consideration is:

“Whether the petitioners are entitled for decree of Divorce Dissolving their marriage solemnized on 13.10.2024 by mutual consent as prayed for?”

6.POINT: To prove their case,the petitioners examined as PWs.1 and 2 and they reiterated the contents of the petition and got marked Exs.P1 to

Ex.P4. According to evidence of PW.1 his marriage was performed with 2nd petitioner on 13.10.2024 at his residence at Thallamapuram village, Proddatur

Mandal, Kadapa District in the presence of elders of both sides as per the

Hindu rites and customs. The marriage was not consummated. Thereafter, some disputes and differences arouse in between the petitioners and they are unable to live together due to their differences. Both the petitioners are living separately since 15.10.2024. The efforts of elders of both sides failed as they are not interested to lead marital life and decided to take divorce to lead independent life as per their will and wish.

7.Further she stated that, 2nd petitioner agreed not to claim any maintenance towards permanent alimony. They agreed not to file any cases

Date: 08.05.2026 3 HMOP.242/2025

against each other in future. Therefore, as there was no possibility for reunion, they filed this petition for dissolving their marriage by mutual consent.

8.PW.2 who is the 2nd petitioner also stated on the same lines as that of

PW.1 and stated that there is no chance of reunion and efforts of counseling were also proved futile and both decided to take divorce on mutual consent.

9.To prove their contention PW.1 relied upon Ex.P1 to Ex.P4 where in

Ex.P1 is the wedding card of petitioners. Ex.P2 is the marriage photo. Ex.P3 is the marriage certificate attested by the Gazetted Officer with marriage photo of petitioners. Ex.P4 is the xerox copies of Aadhar cards of petitioners.

Hence, the petitioners are entitled for divorce by mutual consent as prayed for. Accordingly, this point is answered in favour of the petitioners.

11.In the result, the petition is allowed without cost and the

marriage of the petitioners solemnized on 13.10.2024 is hereby

dissolved by granting decree of divorce on mutual consent.

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

pronounced by me in the open Court, on this the 08 th day of May, 2026.

Sd/- Smt. Sk.Faizunnisa,

SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE,

PRODDATUR

Date: 08.05.2026 4 HMOP.242/2025

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

WITNESSES EXAMINED FOR PETITIONER:

P.W.1 : Kothapalli Udaya Raju

P.W.2 : Kandula Rupa @ Ruth @ Kothapalli Rupa

WITNESSES EXAMINED FOR RESPONDENT : - None-

EXHIBITS MARKED

For Petitioner:

Ex.P.1 : Wedding Card of petitioners.

Ex.P.2 : Marriage photo.

Ex.P.3 : Marriage certificate attested by the Gazetted Officer with the marriage photo of petitioners.

Ex.P.4 : Xerox copies od Aadhar cards of petitioners.

For Respondent: - Nil -

Id/- S.F.,

S.C.J., PDTR

OS/76/2025

Gandluru Veerasekhar reddy vs Ramiseety Satish

08 May 2026

1 O.S.76/2025, dt.08.05.2026

APKD040002882025

IN THE COURT OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE :: PRODDATUR

Present: Smt. Shaik Faizunnisa,

Senior Civil Judge, Proddatur

Friday, this the 08th day of May, 2026

OS No.76 of 2025

Between:

Gandluru Veera Sekhar Reddy, S/o Narasimha Reddy, aged about 65 years, business, residing at D.No.3/91, Prakashnagar, YMR colony, Proddatur town, Kadapa District.

.... Plaintiff

And.

Ramisetty Satish @ Chinna Pullaiah, S/o Pullaiah, aged about 47 years, seasonal business, residing at Kogatam village, Kamalapuram Mandal, Kadapa District.

.... Defendant.

This suit came up on 08.05.2026 for final hearing before me in the presence of Sri. P.Chandra Sekhar, Advocate for the plaintiff and defendant remained exparte and having heard, stood over for consideration till this day, this

Court delivered the following:-

J U D G M E N T

1.This is a suit filed for recovery of Rs.21,26,000/- (Rupees Twenty

One Lakhs and Twenty Six Thousand only) being the principal and interest due under two promissory notes dated 03.08.2021 for Rs.8,00,000/- and dated 15.07.2023 for Rs.6,00,000/- executed by defendant, in favour of the plaintiff agreeing to repay the same with interest at 24% per annum for further future interest and for costs of the suit. On repeated demands of plaintiff, defendant paid an amount of Rs.2,00,000/- towards part payment on 12.01.2023. There after, on repeated demands of the plaintiff the defendant did not repay amount.

Hence, the suit.

2.Affidavit evidence of plaintiff as PW1 filed, Ex.A1 to A3 are marked.

2 O.S.76/2025, dt.08.05.2026

3.The defendant remained set exparte.

4.Heard.

5.Perused the evidence of PW1 and Ex.A1 to A3 are marked. The suit is filed for recovery of money. The evidence of plaintiff i.e., PW1 is left unchallenged as defendant remained exparte. He failed to put forth his version or disprove the version of plaintiff. On the other hand, plaintiff proved his case through his oral and documentary evidence.

6.Ex.A1 is the promissory note dated 03.08.2021 for Rs.8,00,000/- executed by defendant in favour of plaintiff. Ex.A2 is the promissory note dated 15.07.2023 for Rs.6,00,000/- executed by defendant in favour of plaintiff. Ex.A3 is the endorsement on the backside of the promissory note dated 03.08.2021 for

Rs.2,00,000/- Therefore, plaintiff could substantiate his case.

7.In the result, the suit is decreed with costs directing the defendant to pay a sum of Rs.21,26,000/- (Rupees Twenty One Lakhs and Twenty Six

Thousand only) together with subsequent interest at 12% per annum from the date of the suit till the date of decree and thereafter at 6% per annum from the date of decree till the date of realization on the remaining principal amount of Rs.12,00,000/- respectively.

Typed to dictation to the Steno Gr.III, corrected and pronounced by me in open court, this the 08th day of May, 2026.

Sd/- Smt. Sk.Faizunnisa,

Senior Civil Judge,

Proddatur.

Appendix of Evidence

Witnesses examined

For the plaintiff: For the defendant: PW.1: Gandluru Veera Sekhar Reddy - None - Documents marked on behalf of plaintiff: Ex.A1 : Promissory note, dated 03.08.2021 executed by defendant in favour of plaintiff for Rs.8,00,000/-. Ex.A2 : Promissory note, dated 15.07.2023 executed by defendant in favour of plaintiff for Rs.6,00,000/-. Ex.A3 : Endorsement backside of the promissory note dated 03.08.2021 for Rs.2,00,000/- Documents marked on behalf of defendants: Nil

Sd/- Smt. Sk.Faizunnisa,

Senior Civil Judge,

Proddatur.

Order Record 514 total

Case No.	Parties	Date	Type	Outcome
OS/76/2025	Gandluru Veerasekhar reddy vs Ramiseety Satish	08 May 2026	Judgement	—
H.M.O.P/113/2025	Yarasi Viswaanathareddy vs Vsnil	08 May 2026	Order	—
H.M.O.P/242/2025	Kothapalli Udaya Raju vs Nil	08 May 2026	Order	—
IP/49/2024	Vempalli Salanna vs Pothula Veera Sekhar	07 May 2026	Order	—
OS/60/2024	T. Vijay Kumar Reddy vs G. Venkata Lakshumma	07 May 2026	Judgement	—
H.M.O.P/53/2026	Bandi Chandrakanth vs Nil	07 May 2026	Order	—
OS/15/2026	Gurijala Ramana Reddy vs Budda Samuel	06 May 2026	Judgement	—
SC/332/2019	M Ramanjaneyulu vs Kalla Chendrayudu @ Koitaku Chendrayudu	06 May 2026	Judgement	—
H.M.O.P/238/2025	Gajulapalle Venkata Subba Reddy vs Nil	06 May 2026	Order	—
S.O.P/3/2025	Sangieddy Hainatheddy vs Vsnil	06 May 2026	Order	—
H.M.O.P/34/2026	Putturu Uday Kumar vs P. Naga Keerthi alias Keerthi	05 May 2026	Order	—
H.M.O.P/45/2026	Doijode Venkata Ramana Rao vs Nil	05 May 2026	Order	—
OS/409/2014	Posa Sivaramaiah vs Posa Lakshmi Narayana	04 May 2026	Judgement	—
SC/48/2019	State rep. by the SI of Police, Peddamudiam P.S. vs Gangula Rama Gopal Reddy @ Gopal Reddy	04 May 2026	Judgement	—
SC/500/2019	Sub-Inspector of Police vs Sulam Chandra	04 May 2026	Judgement	—
H.M.O.P/156/2025	Challa Aruna Kumari vs Pothuru Siva Prasad	04 May 2026	Order	—
H.M.O.P/194/2025	Sangati Sai Narasimha Reddy vs Nil	04 May 2026	Order	—
OS/238/2017	Rayalaseema Grameena Bank now called as A.P.Grameena Bank rep.by its Branch Manatger Pedda Chappali vs Appalareddy Ayyawari Reddy	01 May 2026	Judgement	—
H.M.O.P/198/2025	Ganjikunta Subblakshmi alias Vani vs Ganjikunta Ravi	29 Apr 2026	Order	—
OS/363/2016	Polamada Narasimhulu and another vs Podamala Rama Mohan and another	25 Apr 2026	Judgement	—
SC/398/2019	The Inspector of Police, Mydukur (U/G)P.S vs Cherukuri Prema Latha	23 Apr 2026	Judgement	—
OS/44/2024	Bhumireddipalle Rama Chandra Reddy vs Mooli Subhadra @ Subhadramma	22 Apr 2026	Judgement	—
SC/70/2018	Inspector of Police Jammalamadugu U PS vs Chinthalappagari Raghunatha Reddy and 2 others	21 Apr 2026	Judgement	—
H.M.O.P/173/2025	Akula Sumanth vs Nil	21 Apr 2026	Order	—
SC/93/2023	Sub-Inspector of Police, Peddamudiam P.S. vs Yerrachennugalla Subbarayudu @ Yerrachennu Chinna Subbarayudu	20 Apr 2026	Judgement	—
H.M.O.P/184/2025	Lepuru Manish vs Nil	20 Apr 2026	Order	—
IP/42/2023	Birru Venkata Ramana vs Vs1. Polatala Subbarayudu @ Subbarayudu	17 Apr 2026	Order	—
OS/142/2013	Mula Malla Reddy vs MS Barathi cement corporation PVT	17 Apr 2026	Judgement	—
SC/40/2022	The Sub-Inspector of Police, Proddatur III town P.S. vs E. Venkata Sudhakar Reddy	17 Apr 2026	Judgement	—
EP/13/2023	Maddika Nagamuni Reddy vs Nagireddy Padmanabha Reddy	16 Apr 2026	Order	—
EP/141/2017	Pabhathi Raghunath vs Butchupalli Pavani	16 Apr 2026	Order	—
SC/281/2019	State rep. by the Sub-Inspector of Police, Duvvur P.S. vs Ammireddy Sudhakar Reddy	16 Apr 2026	Judgement	—
OS/491/2018	Kalluru Vijaya Bhaskara Reddy alias Vijaya Bhaskar Guruji vs Kotturu Venkata Subba Reddy	10 Apr 2026	Judgement	—
OS/410/2014	Appalle alias Appanneni vs Chinthakunta Busaiahgari Muni Swamy Naidu	09 Apr 2026	Judgement	—
H.M.O.P/158/2025	Marabathala Murali vs Nil	09 Apr 2026	Order	—
OS/57/2025	Meda Nagamani vs Dadda Vijaya Bhaskar	08 Apr 2026	Judgement	—
SC/65/2024	Circle Inspector of Police, Jammalamadugu Rural Circle vs Kota Venkata Sivarami Reddy	08 Apr 2026	Judgement	—
H.M.O.P/35/2026	Chinthakayala Raghava Ramudu vs Nil	08 Apr 2026	Order	—
H.M.O.P/134/2023	Rachaneni Venkatesh vs Rachaneni Viswa Bharathi	08 Apr 2026	Order	—
AS/71/2024	C. Srilatha vs Chandragiri Ramanaiah	07 Apr 2026	Order	—
OS/159/2017	Nandaluru Venkatasubbamma vs Nasari Lakshmi Devi	07 Apr 2026	Order	—
OS/359/2018	Yeddula Venkata Rama Muni Reddy vs M Neelamma	07 Apr 2026	Judgement	—
SC/409/2018	State represented by SI of Police, Kalamalla PS. vs Dubbagiri Guru Swamy	07 Apr 2026	Judgement	—
H.M.O.P/221/2025	Sanepalli Rajitha vs Perla Govardhan Reddy	07 Apr 2026	Order	—
EP/24/2025	Mittapalli Mastan vs Joturu Jagannadha Reddy	06 Apr 2026	Order	—
H.M.O.P/24/2026	Vaddi Madhusudhan vs Nil	06 Apr 2026	Order	—
H.M.O.P/94/2025	Dorsala Rajani alias Mamatha vs NIL	06 Apr 2026	Order	—
H.M.O.P/129/2025	Bojja Karthik Kumar vs Golla Rajeswari	06 Apr 2026	Order	—
OS/406/2015	C.Narasareddy vs S.Mahaboob basha and one another	02 Apr 2026	Judgement	—
IP/47/2023	Vaddemani Rama Devi vs Bommu Rama Prasad Reddy	01 Apr 2026	Order	—
H.M.O.P/20/2026	Muppuru Varalakshmi vs Thippabathuni Chandra Sekhar	01 Apr 2026	Order	—
AS/9/2025	Shaik Ameer Basha vs Yerraguntla Subbarayudu	31 Mar 2026	Order	—
EP/68/2023	Adireddy Syam Sundar Reddy vs Gosula Veera Reddy	30 Mar 2026	Order	—
OS/132/2025	Kakarla Bala Gangi Reddy vs Kambam Venkata Reddy	30 Mar 2026	Order	—
SC/24/2023	SHO Chapadu P.S. vs Mandadi Nagesh	26 Mar 2026	Judgement	—
S.O.P/7/2025	Desam Lakshmi Narayana Reddy vs The Branch Manager, Union Bank of India	26 Mar 2026	Order	—
OS/59/2024	Kasireddy Venkata Subba Reddy vs Kodidela Mahaboobbi	25 Mar 2026	Judgement	—
SC/177/2019	State rep. by Inspector of Police, Proddatur Urban Circle. vs B. Muni Pasad	25 Mar 2026	Judgement	—
H.M.O.P/187/2024	Nandyala Kanthamma alias Mundadi Kanthamma vs Mundadi Nagesh	25 Mar 2026	Order	—
OS/33/2019	G V Narayana Reddy vs B V Ramana Reddy	24 Mar 2026	Judgement	—
OS/52/2019	Mutyalapati Indira Kumari and 2 Others vs Mutyalapati Ramanjaneyulu @ M. Anjaneyulu and 2 Others	24 Mar 2026	Order	—
H.M.O.P/7/2026	K. Lakshmidevi alias Devarasetty Lakshmidevi vs K. Siva Kishore Babu	24 Mar 2026	Order	—
H.M.O.P/155/2025	Kadumuru Kartheek vs Nil	24 Mar 2026	Order	—
SC/146/2019	State rep. by the Sub Inspector of Police, Yerraguntla P.S. vs Narreddi Vigneswara Reddy	23 Mar 2026	Judgement	—
EP/45/2022	Challa Siva Reddy vs Bogyam Chinna Kulai Swami	18 Mar 2026	Order	—
IP/39/2017	Palla Venkata Narayana vs Thippvathi Jagannadham and 196 others	18 Mar 2026	Order	—
SC/19/2021	S. I of police vs Vella Ramalingeswara Reddy	18 Mar 2026	Judgement	—
SC/233/2018	SI of Police, Talla Proddatur PS vs Bathala Subbanna	18 Mar 2026	Judgement	—
SC/246/2018	SI of Police, Talla Proddatur PS vs Banda Venkatesu	18 Mar 2026	Judgement	—
H.M.O.P/92/2025	Thalapagala Venkata Lakshmin alias K. Venkata Lakshmi vs Thalapaga Madhava Reddy	18 Mar 2026	Order	—
H.M.O.P/106/2025	Gurujala at Yakasi Himabindu vs NIL	18 Mar 2026	Order	—
H.M.O.P/236/2025	Obulreddy Suma Pranavi vs Vsnil	18 Mar 2026	Order	—
H.M.O.P/126/2025	Kalluri Haritha vs Kalluri Gangadhar	17 Mar 2026	Order	—
H.M.O.P/138/2025	Arigela Ranga Harinath vs Nil	17 Mar 2026	Order	—
H.M.O.P/179/2024	Boggarapu Sireesha vs Bogarapu Ravi Prakash	17 Mar 2026	Order	—
EP/219/2016	Ayyaluri Papayagari Papi Reddy vs Ankireddypalli Mallijarjuna Reddy	13 Mar 2026	Order	—
IP/52/2022	Cahalivindla Siva Reddy vs Gouru Siva Rami Reddy	13 Mar 2026	Order	—
OS/45/2024	Peddamudiam Sreenivasulu vs Polaka Bramhananda Reddy	13 Mar 2026	Judgement	—
SC/211/2024	Sub-Inspector of Police, Proddatur II town U/G P.S vs Chinnasubbigalla Venkatesh	13 Mar 2026	Judgement	—
H.M.O.P/211/2025	Marthala Vijayalakshmi vs Mettupalli Dasthagiri Reddy	13 Mar 2026	Order	—
AS/11/2025	Uyyala Varada Reddy vs Veeram Reddy Lakshmi Reddy	12 Mar 2026	Order	—
AS/13/2024	Jampana Pattabhi Reddy vs Gagguturu Shuban	12 Mar 2026	Order	—
H.M.O.P/183/2025	Aluru Rajesh Babu vs Aluru Ramya	12 Mar 2026	Order	—
H.M.O.P/201/2025	Palagiri Siva Prasad vs Vaddemanu Swaroopa Rani	12 Mar 2026	Order	—
IP/78/2022	Meda Raja Narasimha Prathap vs Nukala Ramana Murthy	11 Mar 2026	Order	—
SC/314/2018	State represented by Sub-Inspector of Police, Kondapuram P.S. vs Anisetty Venkata Manjunath @ Manjunath	11 Mar 2026	Judgement	—
IP/4/2020	Param Dattatreya Reddy vs Mereva Venkata Subbaiah and 9 ohters	10 Mar 2026	Order	—
H.M.O.P/192/2025	Siliveri Sudheer Kumar vs Nil	10 Mar 2026	Order	—
IP/9/2026	Vaddi Giridhar vs C. Ram Bhupal Chowdary	09 Mar 2026	Order	—
H.M.O.P/2/2026	Devagudi Sridhar Reddy vs Nil	09 Mar 2026	Order	—
IP/42/2019	Karnati Rama Muni Reddy vs Konathala Subba Reddy	06 Mar 2026	Order	—
SC/227/2020	Sub Inspector of Police vs Bingi Tirupal @ Yeturu Thirupal	06 Mar 2026	Judgement	—
H.M.O.P/160/2025	Koduru Subbarayudu vs Nil	06 Mar 2026	Order	—
IP/56/2019	Kandula Nageswara Reddy vs Bogala Chandra Mohan Reddy	03 Mar 2026	Order	—
OS/460/2018	Narapureddy Sanjaya Ramesh Reddy vs Sirrapu Santha Kumar	03 Mar 2026	Judgement	—
H.M.O.P/148/2025	Palla Suresh Kumar vs Nil	03 Mar 2026	Order	—
IP/73/2025	Vardhi Vara Prasad vs C. Ram Bhupal Chowdary	02 Mar 2026	Order	—
H.M.O.P/115/2025	Pattem yoganjaneyulu vs Nil	02 Mar 2026	Order	—
H.M.O.P/149/2025	Posa Madhusudhan vs Nil	26 Feb 2026	Order	—
OS/1/2019	Lebaka Venkata Subba Reddy vs Narala Bali Reddy	25 Feb 2026	Order	—

Showing 100 of 514 orders — Log in to browse all pages.

Monthly Orders (Last 12 Months)

May 2026		18
Apr 2026		33
Mar 2026		47
Feb 2026		41
Jan 2026		36
Dec 2025		34
Nov 2025		29
Oct 2025		42
Sep 2025		36
Aug 2025		38
Jul 2025		57
Jun 2025		39

Frequently Asked Questions

How many cases has Smt. Shaik Faizunnisa handled?

Smt. Shaik Faizunnisa has handled 515 court orders since 2025 at II Additional District Judge Court, Proddatur (Taluka). The average disposal rate is 34 orders per month.

What types of cases does Smt. Shaik Faizunnisa hear?

Based on available records, Smt. Shaik Faizunnisa primarily handles Civil matters (Original Suits, Execution Petitions) and Criminal matters (Sessions Cases) at II Additional District Judge Court, Proddatur (Taluka).

Where is Smt. Shaik Faizunnisa currently posted?

Smt. Shaik Faizunnisa is posted as Senior Civil Judge, Proddatur at II Additional District Judge Court, Proddatur (Taluka), Kadapa, Andhra Pradesh.

Are judgments by Smt. Shaik Faizunnisa available online?

Yes. 5 judgments by Smt. Shaik Faizunnisa are available on Legistro with full text, outcome, and sections cited.

How fast does Smt. Shaik Faizunnisa dispose cases?

Smt. Shaik Faizunnisa disposes approximately 34 cases per month, based on 515 orders handled over their tenure at II Additional District Judge Court, Proddatur (Taluka).

Since when is Smt. Shaik Faizunnisa serving?

Smt. Shaik Faizunnisa has been serving at II Additional District Judge Court, Proddatur (Taluka) since 2025. and is currently posted there.

Case Types

H 35%

OS 27%

SC 17%

IP 11%

EP 6%

AS 2%

S 2%

CMA 0%

Posting History

Feb 2025 — Present

Senior Civil Judge, Proddatur · 515 orders

Other Judges at this Court

Smt.K.Satya Kumari

II Additional District and Sessions Judge Proddatu...

903 orders

Sri D.Venkateswarlu Naik

VIII Additional District and Sessions Judge Prodda...

0 orders

Sri K.Surendra Reddy

I Additional Junior Civil Judge, Proddatur

0 orders

Smt.E.Prathiba

Principal Junior Civil Judge, Proddatur

666 orders

← View all judges at II Additional District Judge Court, Proddatur (Taluka)