Currently Serving

Shake Khwaja Rahiman

Principal Junior Civil Judge -cum- Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Nidadavole

Junior Civil Courts, Nidadavole · West Godavari · Andhra Pradesh

Shake Khwaja Rahiman, Principal Junior Civil Judge -cum- Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Nidadavole, is posted at Junior Civil Courts, Nidadavole, West Godavari, Andhra Pradesh, India. 374 court orders on record since 2025. 13 judgments with full text available. Primarily handles CC, OS, EP cases.

374

Total Orders

Judgments

Orders/Month

Postings

Featured Judgments

OS/219/2025

Guntupalli Srinivasa Rao vs Ganji Gandhi

15 May 2026

A.C.J. (Jr. Div.,) Nidadavole O.S.219 of 2025 1 Dt.15.05.2026.

IN THE COURT OF THE ADDITIONAL CIVIL JUDGE (JUNIOR DIVISION)::

NIDADAVOLE.

Present: Sri. SHAKE KHWAJA RAHIMAN Addl. Civil Judge(Junior Division), Nidadavole.

Friday, this the 15th day of May, 2026.

O.S. No.219/2025

Between: Guntupalli Srinivasa Rao, S/o. Venkateswara Rao, A/48 years, Male, Cultivation, R/o. Door No. 10-29, Bandaru Vari Street, Katakoteswaram Village, H/o. Tadimalla, Nidadavole Mandal, E.G.Dt.,

….. Plaintiff

And

Ganji Gandhi, S/o. Lakshmana Rao, A/36 years, Male, Bank Employee, presently working in Union Bank of India, Kovvur Road Branch, Jangareddigudem, Jangareddigudem Mandal, Eluru Dist.,

….. Defendant

This Suit is coming before me on 11.05.2026 for final hearing in the presence of Sri K. Chitti Babu and Sri S. Srinivasa Rao, learned Advocates for plaintiff and the defendant set exparte and having stood over for consideration till this day, this court delivered the following:

J U D G M E N T

1) This Suit is filed by the plaintiff against the defendant for recovery of sum of

Rs.12,03,066/- (Rupees Twelve lakhs three thousand and sixty six only) along with subsequent interest at the rate of 18% per annum on the principal sum of

Rs.7,00,000/- (Rupees Seven lakhs only) from the rate of suit till the rate of realization and for costs of the suit.

2) The case of the plaintiff in brief as follows:

The defendant approached the plaintiff and borrowed an amount of

Rs. 7,00,000/- (Rupees Seven Lakhs only) for his necessities from the plaintiff on 20.11.2022 for his family expenses and to discharge salary debts, agreeing to repay the same with interest at Rs. 2/- per hundred per month i.e. 24% per annum.

Accordingly the defendant having received the consideration by way of cash from

A.C.J. (Jr. Div.,) Nidadavole O.S.219 of 2025 2 Dt.15.05.2026.

the plaintiff, defendant executed a demand promissory note in favor of the plaintiff on the even date i.e. 11.02.2022 at the residency of the plaintiff in

Kattakotteshwaram Village in the presence of scribe and attestors.

Subsequently after repeated demands made by the plaintiff personally and through mediators for the repayment of the promissory note debt, the defendant issued a cheque bearing number 049310, Dated 26.10.2024 forRs. 5,00,000/- (Rupees Five lakhs only) drawn on Union Bank of India, Nidadavole Branch in favour of the plaintiff towards part payment of the promissory note debt dated 20.11.2022. Promising to honor the cheque on presentation.

Subsequently, when the plaintiff presented the said cheque for collection through Bank of Baroda, Nidadavole Branch, the said cheque was returned as unpaid along with cheque written memo dated 11.11.2024,stating funds insufficient in the bank account of the defendant. Immediately the plaintiff intimated the defendant about dishonor of the cheque issued by him and demanded to pay the bounced cheque amount immediately.

But defendant did not respond. On that plaintiff got issued statutory legal notice dated 18.11.2024 to the defendant demanding him to pay the amount of Rs.

5,00,000/- (Rupees Five Lakhs only) covered under bounced cheque. The defendant received a said legal notice on 19.11.2024, but he failed to pay the said amount to the plaintiff within stipulated period. Subsequently, plaintiff demanded the defendant through mediators to discharge the promissory note dated 20.11.2022, but of no use. Having no other go, the plaintiff is obligated to file this suit for recovery of debt under the above promissory note dated 20.11.2022 from the defendant together with interest. Hence this suit.

3) Summons through court sent to the defendant. Sufficiently served. Defendant called absent. No representation. Hence defendant set exparte on 02.01.2026.

4) The plaintiff filed his chief affidavit.

5) Heard.

A.C.J. (Jr. Div.,) Nidadavole O.S.219 of 2025 3 Dt.15.05.2026.

6) Now the point for consideration is:

1. Whether the suit promissory note dt. 20.11.2022 is true, valid and binding on the defendant?

2. Whether the plaintiff is entitled for the suit claim as prayed for?

3. To what relief?

POINT NO.1.

7) Plaintiff filed chief examination affidavit and examined as PW1 and one

Chellu Pavan Kumar, witness of the plaintiff, examined as PW2 and Exhibits A1 to

A4 are marked through PW1. Exhibit A1 is original demand promissory note dated 20.11.2022 executed by the defendant in favour of plaintiff. Exhibit A2 is A certified copy of legal notice dated 18.11.2024 issued by the plaintiff to the defendant.

Exhibit A3 is a certified copy of a cheque issued by the defendant in favour of the plaintiff. Exhibit A4 is a certified copy of a complaint in S.T.C. No. 48/2025 filed by the plaintiff dated 30.12.2024.

PW2, who is the attestor of Exhibit A1, also stated the version of PW1.

Whereas the defendant in his written statement merely denied all the allegations, the execution of Exhibit A1 remains unchallenged, as the defendant did not contest the suit. Under Section 118(1)(a) of Negotiable Instruments Act, A presumption arises that promissory notes were executed for consideration unless rebutted.

Since the defendant failed to contest the suit or rebut the presumption, the plaintiff's evidence stands accepted.

Accordingly, point number 1 is answered in the favor of the plaintiff.

Point No.2:

8) Evidence of PW1 and PW2 remains unchallenged as the defendant did not choose to enter into witness box to depose his case. The testimony of PW1 coupled with PW2 is cognate and consistent with the recitals of Exhibits A1 to

Exhibits A4. There is nothing on record to discredit his version. The defendant, having chosen to remain exparte, has not rebutted the plaintiff's evidence in any

A.C.J. (Jr. Div.,) Nidadavole O.S.219 of 2025 4 Dt.15.05.2026.

manner. Hence, the uncontroverted evidence of PW1 coupled with PW2 and

Exhibits A1 to Exhibits A4 stands accepted.

Therefore, the court holds that the plaintiff has successfully established the borrowing, execution of Exhibit A1 and failure of defendant to discharge the debt.

The point for consideration is answered in favour of plaintiff. Holding that he is entitled to the suit amount together with interest and costs.

Accordingly, point No.2 is answered in favour of the plaintiff and against the defendant.

Point No.3:

9). As the points 1 and 2 are answered in favour of the plaintiff, point No.3, which is dependent on point No.1 and 2 is also answered in favour of the plaintiff and against the defendant.

Point No.4:

10). In the result, this suit is decreed in favour of the plaintiff and against the defendant;

a)for a sum of Rs. 12,03,066/- (Rupees Twelve lakhs three thousand sixty six only) along with subsequent interest at the rate of 12% per annum on the principal sum of Rs.7,00,000/- (Rupees Seven lakhs only) from the date of suit till the date of decree and for further interest at the rate of 6% per annum on the principal sum of Rs.7,00,000/- (Rupees Seven lakhs only) from the date of decree till its realization;

and

b)the plaintiff shall be entitled for the costs of the suit.

Typed to my dictation through Adalat AI, computer software and formatted by Typist, corrected, signed and pronounced by me in open court on this 15 th day of May, 2026.

Sd/-SHAKE KHWAJA RAHIMAN

Additional Civil Judge (Junior Division),

Nidadavole.

A.C.J. (Jr. Div.,) Nidadavole O.S.219 of 2025 5 Dt.15.05.2026.

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

WITNESS EXAMINED

FOR PLAINTIFF: FOR DEFENDANT:

PW.1: Guntupalli Srinivasa Rao - NIL -

PW.2: Chellu Pavan Kumar

DOCUMENTS MARKED

FOR PLAINTIFF:

Ex.A1:Original Demand Promissory Note Dt. 20.11.2022 executed by the defendant in favour of plaintiff.

Ex.A2:Certified copy of Legal Notice Dt. 18.11.2024 issued by the plaintiff to the defendant.

Ex.A3:Certified copy of Cheque Dt. 26.10.2024 issued by the defendant in favour of plaintiff.

Ex.A4:Certified copy of Complaint in S.T.C. No. 48/2025 filed by the plaintiff

Dt. 30.12.2024

FOR DEFENDANT:

- Nil - Sd/-SHAKE KHWAJA RAHIMAN

Additional Civil Judge (Junior Division),

Nidadavole.

OS/11/2026

Daparthi Seshagiri vs Smt. Sunakara Satyavathi

11 May 2026

IN THE COURT OF THE ADDITIONAL CIVIL JUDGE (JUNIOR DIVISION)

:: W.G.NIDADAVOLE

Present: Sri.Shake Khwaja Rahiman

Additional Civil Judge (Junior Division)

Nidadavole

Monday, this the 11 th day of May, 2026

ORIGINAL SUIT No.11/2026

BETWEEN: Daparthi Seshagiri, S/o Narayudu, Aged 76 years, Male, Hindu,Cultivation, Door No.1-78, Panchayati Office Road, S.Muppavaram Village, Chagallu

Mandal, E.G.District, Andhra Pradesh ... Plaintiff

And

Sunkara Satyavathi, W/o.Ranga Rao, Aged 60 years, Hindu, Female, Hotel, Business, Door No.2-13, Bandapuram Village, Devarapalli Mandal, E.G.District, Andhra Pradesh. … Defendant

This suit is coming on 05.05.2026 for consideration in the presence of Sri P.Venkanna Babu,Sri S.V.V.Suryanarayana Advocates for Plaintiff and Defendant is set exparte and having stood over for consideration to this day, this Court delivered the following:

J U D G M E N T

1.This is a suit filed by the plaintiff against the defendant for recovery of a sum of Rs.4,90,200/- (Rupees Four lakhs ninety thousand and two hundred only) along with subsequent interest at the rate of 24% per annum on the

principal sum of Rs.1,50,000/- (Rupees one lakh fifty thousand only) from the

date of the suit till date of realization and for costs of the suit.

2. The brief averments of plaint are that:

On 01.06.2023 the defendant borrowed an amount of Rs.1,50,000/- from the plaintiff for his family expenses in consideration of amount received by the defendant, the defendant executed a demand promissory note in favour of the plaintiff at the house of plaintiff S.Muppavaram village on the same day itself and agreed to repay the debt with interest at rate of 18% p.a. Subsequently, the 2 plaintiff demanded the defendant personally, through elders for discharge of the amount several times but the defendant did not choose to repay the same.

3. Summons of defendant through court was served personally on 06.02.2026, at the first hearing, on 23.02.2026 the defendant was set exparte for non- appearance.

4. During the course of enquiry, the plaintiff is examined P.W.1 and got marked

Exs.A1 to A3 on his behalf.

5. Heard the arguments of the plaintiff counsel. Perused the pleadings and documents.

6. Now the following point for arises for consideration of the court:

i) Whether the plaintiff is entitled to recover the suit amount as prayed for?

ii) To what relief?

7. Point No.1:

i) On behalf of plaintiff, himself was examined as PW1 his chief examination affidavit was affirmed on oath and treated as his examination in chief in lieu.

Ex.A1 to A3 were marked through PW1. Ex.A.1 is the Original Promissory Note dt.01.06.2023, Ex.A.2 is the original Promissory Note dt.01.06.2023,Ex.A.3 is

Office copy of Legal notice dt.17.11.2025, the PW1 reiterated the contents of the plaint in his chief affidavit. The evidence of PW1 along with Ex.A1 to A3 are sufficient to prove by preponderance of probabilities of the plaint facts.

ii) Similarly the execution of Ex.A1 to A3 by the defendant stands proved. The defendant remained exparte and did not choose to dispute his signature on Ex.A1 and A2. Hence, the plaintiff is entitled for the benefit of presumption under section 118(1)(a) of Negotiable Instrument Act that the defendant executed Ex.A1 and A2

A3 in favour of the plaintiff for lawful consideration received by him from the plaintiff. Accordingly point is answered in favour of the plaintiff against the defendant.

8. Point No.2:

i) The evidence of PW1 remains unchallenged, as the defendant did not choose to enter into witness box to depose his case. The testimony of PW1 is 3 cogent and consistent with the recitals of Ex.A1 to Ex.A3. There is nothing on record to discredit his version. The defendant, having chosen to remain exparte, has not rebutted the plaintiff’s evidence in any manner. Hence, the uncontroverted evidence of PW1 and Ex.A1 to Ex.A3 stands accepted.

ii) Therefore, the Court holds that the plaintiff has successfully established the borrowing, execution of Ex.A1 to Ex.A3, and failure of the defendant to discharge the debt.

iii) The point for consideration is answered in favour of the plaintiff, holding that he is entitled to the suit amount together with interest and costs.

Accordingly, point No.2 is answered in favour of plaintiff.

9. In the result, the suit is decreed in favour of the plaintiff and against the defendant.

a) for a sum of Rs.4,90,200/- (Rupees Four lakhs ninety thousand and two hundred only) along with subsequent interest at the rate of 12% p.a. on

principal amount of Rs.1,50,000/- (Rupees one lakh fifty thousand only)from

the date decree and for further interest at the rate of 6% p.a. on the principal sum of Rs.1,50,000/- from the date of decree till its realization; and

b) The plaintiff shall be entitled for the costs of the suit.

Typed to the Stenographer (Contract Basis), corrected and pronounced by me in the open Court on this the 11 th day of May, 2026.

Sd/-Shake Khwaja Rahiman

Additional Civil Judge(Junior Division)

Nidadavole.

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

WITNESSES EXAMINED

FOR PLAINTIFF: FOR DEFENDANT: P.W.1: Daparthi Seshagiri Nil

DOCUMENTS MARKED:

FOR PLAINTIFF: Ex.A.1: Original Promissory Note dt.01.06.2023 executed by the defendant in favour of plaintiff.

Ex.A.2: Original Promissory Note dt.01.06.2023 executed by the defendant in favour of plaintiff. Ex.A.3: Office copy of Legal notice dt.17.11.2025 issued by the plaintiff’s council to the defendant and Postal Receipt.

FOR DEFENDANT: - NIL

Sd/-Shake Khwaja Rahiman

Additional Civil Judge(Junior Division)

Nidadavole.

OS/197/2025

Chirla Chandramouleswara Reddy vs Kothalanka Sankuthala

15 May 2026

IN THE COURT OF THE ADDITIONAL CIVIL JUDGE (JUNIOR DIVISION)

:: W.G.NIDADAVOLE

Present: Sri.Shake Khwaja Rahiman

Additional Civil Judge (Junior Division)

Nidadavole

Friday, this the 15 th day of May, 2026

ORIGINAL SUIT No.197/2025

BETWEEN: Chirla Chandramouleswera Reddy, S/o .Satya Gopal Reddy, Male 58 years, R/o Tadimalla village of Nidadavole Mandal of E.G.District.

... Plaintiff

And

Kothalanka Sankuthala, W/o.Late Syamala Rao, Female, Home Maker, Age 56 years, Sivalayam Street, Katakotesweram Village, Nidadavole Mandal of E.G.District. … Defendant

This suit is coming on 14.05.2026 for consideration in the presence of Sri T.N.V.Surya Prakash Advocate for Plaintiff and Defendant is set exparte and having stood over for consideration to this day, this Court delivered the following:

J U D G M E N T

1.This is a suit filed by the plaintiff against the defendant for recovery of a sum of Rs.5,57,000/- (Rupees Five lakhs fifty seven thousand only) along with subsequent interest at the rate of 24% per annum on the principal sum of

Rs.4,00,000/- (Rupees four lakhs only) from the date of the suit till date of realization and for costs of the suit.

2. The brief averments of plaint are that:

On 03.03.2024 the defendant borrowed an amount of Rs.4,00,000/- from the plaintiff for his family expenses and discharge of sundry debts and on the even date she executed a demand promissory note in consideration of amount received by the defendant, the defendant executed a demand promissory note in favour of the plaintiff at the house of plaintiff Tadimalla village on the same day itself and agreed to repay the debt with interest at rate of 24% p.a. Subsequently, 2 the plaintiff demanded the defendant personally, through elders for discharge of the amount several times but the defendant did not choose to repay the same.

3. Summons of defendant through court was served personally on 11.11.2025, at the first hearing, on 08.12.2025 the defendant was set exparte for non- appearance.

4. During the course of enquiry, the plaintiff is examined P.W.1 and got marked

Exs.A1 to A3 on his behalf.

5. Heard the arguments of the plaintiff counsel. Perused the pleadings and documents.

6. Now the following point for arises for consideration of the court:

i) Whether the plaintiff is entitled to recover the suit amount as prayed for?

ii) To what relief?

7. Point No.1:

i) On behalf of plaintiff, himself was examined as PW1 his chief examination affidavit was affirmed on oath and treated as his examination in chief in lieu.

Ex.A1 to A3 were marked through PW1. Ex.A.1 is the Original Promissory Note dt.03.03.2024, Ex.A.2 is the Office copy of Legal notice, dt.10.04.2025,Ex.A.3 is

Office copy of Postal receipt dt.11.04.2025, the PW1 reiterated the contents of the plaint in his chief affidavit. The evidence of PW1 along with Ex.A1 to A3 are sufficient to prove by preponderance of probabilities of the plaint facts.

A3 in favour of the plaintiff for lawful consideration received by him from the plaintiff. Accordingly point is answered in favour of the plaintiff against the defendant.

8. Point No.2:

ii) Therefore, the Court holds that the plaintiff has successfully established the borrowing, execution of Ex.A1 to Ex.A3, and failure of the defendant to discharge the debt.

iii) The point for consideration is answered in favour of the plaintiff, holding that he is entitled to the suit amount together with interest and costs.

Accordingly, point No.2 is answered in favour of plaintiff.

9. In the result, the suit is decreed in favour of the plaintiff and against the defendant.

a) for a sum of Rs.5,57,000/- (Rupees Five lakhs fifty seven thousand only) along with subsequent interest at the rate of 12% p.a. on principal amount of

Rs.4,00,000/- (Rupees four lakhs only)from the date decree and for further interest at the rate of 6% p.a. on the principal sum of Rs.4,00,000/- from the date of decree till its realization; and

b) The plaintiff shall be entitled for the costs of the suit.

Typed to the Stenographer, corrected and pronounced by me in the open Court on this the 15 th day of May, 2026.

Sd/-S hake Khwaja Rahiman

Additional Civil Judge(Junior Division)

Nidadavole.

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

WITNESSES EXAMINED

FOR PLAINTIFF: FOR DEFENDANT: P.W.1: Chirla Chandramouleswara Reddy Nil

DOCUMENTS MARKED:

FOR PLAINTIFF: Ex.A.1: Original Promissory Note dt.03.03.2024. Ex.A.2: Office copy of Legal notice dt.10.04.2025. Ex.A.3: Office copy of postal receipt dt.11.4.2025 FOR DEFENDANT: - NIL

Sd/-S hake Khwaja Rahiman

Additional Civil Judge(Junior Division)

Nidadavole.

OS/132/2024

Jesta Narendra vs Vennapusa Nagarjuna Reddy

30 Jul 2025

IN THE COURT OF THE PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE (JUNIOR DIVISION)-CUM-

ADDL. JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF I CLASS:: NIDADAVOLE.

Present: SRI. S.KHWAJA RAHIMAN,

Additional Civil Judge (Junior Division)

FAC/ Principal Civil Judge (Junior Division) Nidadavole

Wednesday, this the 30th day of July, 2025.

O.S.No.132 of 2024

Between:

Jesta Narendra, S/o Veera Venkata Satyanarayana, Aged 30 years, Hindu, Male, R/o Garuvuveedhi, Samisragudem Village, Nidadavole Mandal, West Godavari Distric.

....Plaintiff.

And

Vennapusa Nagarjuna Reddy, S/o Subba Reddy, Aged 30 years, Hindu, Male, R/o D.No.1-499, Kothapallem Village, Darsi Mandal, Prakasam District.

....Defendant.

This suit is coming on 30.07.2025 for final hearing before me in the presence of Sri T.N.v Surya Prakash, Learned Advocate for plaintiff and the defendant remained ex-parte and having stood over for consideration till this day, this Court delivered the following:

J U D G M E N T

The suit is filed by the plaintiff under Order VII Rule 1 Section 26 CPC, prays to pass a decree in favor of the plaintiff and against the defendant, for a sum of Rs.8,59,000/- (Rupees Eight Lakhs Fifty Nine Thousand and only), with subsequent interest, basing on the suit promissory note dated 03.07.2021.

2. The brief averments of the plaint are:-

The defendant borrowed an amount of Rs.5,00,000/- (Rupees Five Lakhs only) from the Plaintiff, on 03.07.2021, for the purpose of his Business expenses and agreeing to repay the same with interest at 24% P.A. The defendant executed a demand promissory note, on the same day, in favour of the plaintiff.

Inspite of repeated demands made by the plaintiff personally and through elders, 2 but defendant did not choose to discharge the debt and he is postponing the repayment of the same on one pretext or other. On demand of plaintiff, defendant issued a chque of Rs.3,40,000/- for part payment on 28.11.2023 drawn on Kotak

Mahindra bank Micro Village center H.A.L., 3rd stage, 80 feet road, new

Thippasandra, Karnataka, with cheque bearing No.000007. The plaintiff presented the said cheque on 13.02.2024, in State Bank of India, Nidadavole

Branch, the above cheque returned on 15.02.2024 unpaid with an endorsement of “DRAWERS SIGNATURE DIFFERS” along with cheque return memo. On that the plaintiff issued legal notice on 22.02.2024 and defendant refused to receive the said notice and got returned the said notice with an endorsement that “no such person in this address” on 24.02.2024 and the defendant kept quiet. Hence, the suit.

3.The defendant failed to file written statement within stipulated period.

Hence, defendant was set exparte.

4.During the course of ex-party evidence, the plaintiff himself was examined as PW.1. He produced Ex.A1, through his evidence.

5.Heard plaintiff’s counsel.

6.Now the point for consideration is:

“Whether the plaintiff is entitled to decree, as prayed for”?

7. POINT:

To substantiate his claim, the plaintiff himself was examined as PW.1 and he produced Ex. A1. Ex.A1 is the suit promissory note, dated 03.07.2021 for

Rs.5,00,000/-. The evidence of PW1 is reiteration of contents of the plaint. He deposed that the defendant borrowed an amount of Rs.5,00,000/- from him on 03.07.2021, under Ex.A1, agreeing to repay the said amounts at 24% p.a., later, the defendant failed to repay the above said promissory note amount with interest.

8.The oral evidence of PW.1 is unchallenged. Hence, the plaintiff by producing the oral evidence of PW. 1 and the documentary evidence i.e., Ex.A1 3 has established his case. When the plaintiff discharged his burden, the onus shifts to defendant. But, here in this case, the defendant failed to file written statement within stipulated period and he did not contest and deny the claim of the plaintiff. Hence, this court hold that, the plaintiff is entitled to suit claim, as prayed for. Accordingly, this point is answered.

9.In the result, the suit is decreed with costs, against the defendant, for a sum of Rs.8,59,000/- (Rupees Eight Lakhs Fifty Nine Thousand and only), with subsequent interest @ 12 % p.a. from the date of suit, till the date of decree and thereafter @ 6% p.a. from the date of decree, till realization on the principal sum of Rs.5,00,000/-(Rupees Five Lakhs only).

Typed to my dictation by Stenographer Grade-III, corrected and pronounced by me in open court on this the 30 th day of July, 2025. //Sd/- S.Khwaja Rahiman// Addl. Civil Judge(Junior Division) FAC/- Prl. Civil Judge (Junior Division) Nidadavole.

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

WITNESSES EXAMINED

FOR PLAINTIFF: FOR DEFENDANT:

P.W.1: Jesta Narendra - None -

DOCUMENTS MARKED

FOR PLAINTIFF:

Ex.A1: Suit promissory note dated 03.07.2021, for Rs.5,00,000/- executed by the defendant in favour of plaintiff.

FOR DEFENDANT: --NIL-- //Sd/- S.Khwaja Rahiman// Addl. Civil Judge(Junior Division) FAC/- Prl. Civil Judge (Junior Division) Nidadavole.

OS/2/2025

Avala Barriah vs Avala Kotaiah

28 Jul 2025

O.S.No.02/2025

IN THE COURT OF THE PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE (JUNIOR DIVISION) ::

NIDADAVOLE.

Present: SRI. S.KHWAJA RAHIMAN,

Additional Civil Judge (Junior Division)

FAC/Principal Civil Judge (Junior Division) Nidadavole

Monday, this the 28th day of July, 2025.

O.S.No.2 of 2025

Between:

Avala Barriah, S/o Chenchu, Aged 46 years, Hindu, Male, Properties, R/o Korumamdi Village, Nidadavole Mandal.

....Plaintiff.

And

Avala Kotaiah, S/o Tatayya, Aged 48 years, Hindu, Male, R/o Kothapeta, Pullaigudem (Apparaopeta limits) Tadepalligudem Mandal, West Godavari District.

....Defendant.

This suit is coming on 02.07.2025 for final hearing before me in the presence of Sri D. Ravi Shankar, Learned Advocate for plaintiff and the defendant remained ex-parte and having stood over for consideration till this day, this Court delivered the following:

J U D G M E N T

The suit is filed by the plaintiff under Order VII Rule 1 Section 26 CPC, prays to pass a decree in favor of the plaintiff and against the defendant, for a sum of Rs.2,55,600/- (Rupees Two Lakhs Fifty Five Thousand and Six hundred only), with subsequent interest, basing on the suit promissory note

dated 24.09.2023.

2. The brief averments of the plaint are:-

The defendant borrowed an amount of Rs.1,00,000/- + Rs.1,00,000 =

Rs.2,00,000 (Rupees Two Lakhs only) from the Plaintiff, on 24.09.2023, for the purpose of his family expenses and discharging of debts and agreeing to repay 2

O.S.No.02/2025

the same with interest at 24% P.A. The defendant executed Two demand promissory notes for Rs.1,00,000/- each, on the same day, in favour of the plaintiff. After repeated demands made by plaintiff issued registered notice on 04.09.2024. But the defendant is postponing the repayment of the debt on one pretext or the other. Hence, the suit.

3.The suit summons issued to the defendant were served personally, but, the defendant neither appeared in person nor through a counsel and remained exaprte.

4.During the course of ex-party evidence, the plaintiff himself was examined as PW.1 and he produced Exs.A1 to A4, which are the suit promissory notes, office copy of legal notice got issued by the plaintiff to the defendant and the postal acknowledgment.

5.Heard plaintiff’s counsel.

6.Now the point for consideration is:

“Whether the plaintiff is entitled to decree, as prayed for”?

7. POINT:

To substantiate his claim, the plaintiff himself was examined as P.W.1 and produced Exs.A1 to A4. The evidence of PW1 is reiteration of contents of the plaint. He deposed that the defendant borrowed an amount of Rs.1,00,000/- from him on 24.09.2023, under Ex.A1, agreeing to repay the said amount at 24% p.a. He again borrowed an amount of Rs.1,00,000/- on the same day under

Ex.A2, agreeing to repay the said amount at 24% p.a. Later, the defendant failed to repay the above said promissory notes amount with interest. Later, he demanded the defendant several times to discharge the promissory notes debt with interest, but, the defendant postponing the same on one pretext or other, then he got issued legal notice to the defendant under Ex.A3, which was received by the defendant under Ex.A4, but, the defendant kept quiet.

8.The evidence of P.W.1 is unchallenged. Hence, the plaintiff by producing the the oral evidence of P.W.1 and the documentary evidence i.e., 3

O.S.No.02/2025

Exs.A1 to A4, has established his case. When the plaintiff discharged his burden, the onus shifts to defendant. But, here in this case, the defendant neither denied the claim of the plaintiff nor contested the suit. Hence, this court hold that, the plaintiff is entitled to suit claim, as prayed for. Accordingly, this point is answered.

9.In the result, the suit is decreed with costs against the defendant, for a sum of Rs.2,55,600/- (Rupees Two Lakhs Fifty Five Thousand and Six hun- dred only), with subsequent interest @ 24 % p.a. from the date of suit, till the date of decree and thereafter @ 6% p.a. from the date of decree, till realization on the principal sum of Rs.2,00,000/- (Rupees Two Lakhs only).

Typed to my dictation by Stenographer Grade-III, corrected and pronounced by me in Open Court, on this the 28 th day of July, 2025.

//Sd/- S. Khwaja Rahiman//

ADDITIONAL CIVIL JUDGE (JUNIOR DIVISION)

FAC/PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE (JUNIOR DIVISION)

NIDADAVOLE

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

Witnesses examined for

Plaintiff: Defendant :

P.W.1:Avula BarriahNIL

Documents marked

For Plaintiff:

Ex.A1: Suit Promissory Note dt.24.09.2023.

Ex.A2: Suit Promissory Note dt.24.09.2023.

Ex.A3: Office copy of legal notice dated 04.09.2024.

Ex.A4: Acknowledgment

For Defendant: - Nil - //Sd/- S. Khwaja Rahiman//

ADDITIONAL CIVIL JUDGE (JUNIOR DIVISION)

FAC/PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE (JUNIOR DIVISION)

NIDADAVOLE

Order Record 368 total

Case No.	Parties	Date	Type	Outcome
OS/197/2025	Chirla Chandramouleswara Reddy vs Kothalanka Sankuthala	15 May 2026	Judgement	—
OS/219/2025	Guntupalli Srinivasa Rao vs Ganji Gandhi	15 May 2026	Judgement	—
STC/9/2026	Sangani Venkata Narayana vs Polimeru Lakshmi	14 May 2026	Order	Compromised
OS/15/2026	Meripo Sujatha vs Meripo Renuka Devi	13 May 2026	Judgement	—
OS/11/2026	Daparthi Seshagiri vs Smt. Sunakara Satyavathi	11 May 2026	Judgement	—
OS/109/2025	Khandavalli Manikyala Rao vs Bakkapati Kameswara Rao	11 May 2026	Judgement	—
CC/243/2024	Sub Inspector of Police, Chagallu P.S. vs Desabathula Chandu	11 May 2026	Judgement	—
OS/9/2021	Satti Sri Rama Reddy vs Poosarapu Veera Venkata Satyanarayana	08 May 2026	Judgement	—
OS/131/2020	Satti Sri Rama Reddy vs Sanku Bhaskara Rao	08 May 2026	Judgement	—
OS/42/2022	Chowtipalli Rama Devi @ Ramabhai vs Kasturi sujatha Lakshmi	13 Dec 2025	Order	—
OS/130/2025	Tatina Sirisha vs Alapati Hare Krishna	13 Dec 2025	Order	—
CC/116/2025	The Sub Inspector of Police, Samisragudem vs Meripo Vijay Kumar	13 Dec 2025	Order	—
CC/223/2025	The Sub-Inspector of Police, Samisragudem PS vs Meesala Krishna Rao	13 Dec 2025	Order	—
CC/325/2025	The S.H.O., Samisragudem PS vs Mare Srinivasu	13 Dec 2025	Order	—
CC/328/2025	The S.H.O., Samisragudem PS vs Adabala Durga Pavan	13 Dec 2025	Order	—
CC/329/2025	Proh. and Excise Inspector, Nidadavole vs Vaka Srinu	13 Dec 2025	Order	—
CC/337/2024	Sub Inspector of Police, Samisragudem P.S. vs Gangumalla Durga Rao	13 Dec 2025	Order	—
CC/340/2025	The Proh and Excise Sub-Inspector, Ndd vs Miriyala Prabha	13 Dec 2025	Order	—
CC/341/2025	The Proh and Excise Sub-Inspector, Ndd vs Nadimpali Srinivasa Raju	13 Dec 2025	Order	—
CC/343/2025	The Proh and Excise Sub-Inspector, Ndd vs Sunkara Ratna Kumari	13 Dec 2025	Order	—
CC/344/2025	The Proh and Excise Sub-Inspector, Ndd vs Marisetti Srinu	13 Dec 2025	Order	—
CC/345/2025	The Proh and Excise Sub-Inspector, Ndd vs Vaka Chakravarthi alias Danayya	13 Dec 2025	Order	—
CC/348/2025	Proh and Excise Sub-Inspector, Ndd vs Elipe Yesubabu	13 Dec 2025	Order	—
CC/349/2025	The Proh and Excise Sub-Inspector, Ndd vs Didde Anji	13 Dec 2025	Order	—
CC/355/2025	The Proh and Excise Sub-Inspector Ndd vs Marisetti Venkateswarlu	13 Dec 2025	Order	—
CC/356/2025	The Proh and Excise Sub-Inspector Ndd vs Palaparthi Srinivasa Rao	13 Dec 2025	Order	—
CC/357/2025	The Proh and Excise Sub-Inspector Ndd vs Juttuga Gogulamma	13 Dec 2025	Order	—
CC/358/2025	The Proh and Excise Sub-Inspector Ndd vs Muppidi Narasimha Murthy	13 Dec 2025	Order	—
CC/359/2025	The Proh and Excise Sub-Inspector Ndd vs Pasupuleti Subba Rao	13 Dec 2025	Order	—
CC/363/2025	Proh and Excise Sub-Inspector vs Marri Setti Babu	13 Dec 2025	Order	—
CC/364/2025	Proh and Excise Sub-Inspector vs Bandula Ramakrishna	13 Dec 2025	Order	—
CC/365/2025	Proh and Excise Sub-Inspector vs Karsinapu Rani	13 Dec 2025	Order	—
CC/368/2025	Proh and Excise Sub-Inspector vs Penke Venkata Rao	13 Dec 2025	Order	—
CC/371/2025	Proh and Excise Sub-Inspector vs Relli Rambabu	13 Dec 2025	Order	—
CC/380/2025	The SI of Police, Samisragudem vs Maddala Prabhu	13 Dec 2025	Order	—
CC/384/2025	The SI Proh and Excise Ndd vs Kambala Anjaneyulu	13 Dec 2025	Order	—
CC/387/2025	The Proh and Excise Sub-Inspector vs Saali Nagaraju	13 Dec 2025	Order	—
CC/389/2025	The Proh and Excise Inspector vs Sanam Dhrmaraju	13 Dec 2025	Order	—
CC/390/2025	The Proh and Excise Inspector vs Velagana Subba Lakshmi	13 Dec 2025	Order	—
CC/395/2025	Proh and Excise Sub Inspector vs Chadarasi Satyanarayana	13 Dec 2025	Order	—
CC/396/2025	Proh and Excise Sub Inspector vs Kattula Pedababu	13 Dec 2025	Order	—
CC/397/2025	Proh and Excise Sub Inspector vs Kasagani Ganesh	13 Dec 2025	Order	—
CC/398/2025	Proh and Excise Sub Inspector vs Mannem Satyanarayana	13 Dec 2025	Order	—
CC/400/2025	Proh and Excise Sub Inspector vs Yalangi Harshavardhan	13 Dec 2025	Order	—
CC/401/2025	Proh and Excise Sub Inspector vs Chidipi Gandhi	13 Dec 2025	Order	—
CC/402/2025	Proh and Excise Sub Inspector vs Komati Padma	13 Dec 2025	Order	—
CC/403/2025	Proh and Excise Sub Inspector vs Akumuri Raju	13 Dec 2025	Other	—
CC/404/2025	Proh and Excise Sub Inspector vs Matta Nageswara Rao	13 Dec 2025	Order	—
CC/405/2025	Proh and Excise Sub Inspector vs Bollam Ramesh	13 Dec 2025	Order	—
CC/406/2025	The Proh and Excise Sub Inspector vs Bayye Suresh Babu	13 Dec 2025	Order	—
CC/407/2025	The Proh and Excise Sub Inspector vs Marugudi Suresh	13 Dec 2025	Order	—
CC/417/2025	The Sub Inspector, Proh and Excise vs Bollam Posi Babu	13 Dec 2025	Order	—
CC/418/2025	The Sub Inspector, Proh and Excise vs Koyyala Krishna	13 Dec 2025	Order	—
CC/419/2025	The Sub Inspector, Proh and Excise vs Raghavaraju Pthuraju	13 Dec 2025	Order	—
CC/420/2025	The Sub Inspector Proh and Excise vs Rajulapati Venkateswara Rao	13 Dec 2025	Order	—
CC/421/2025	The Sub Inspector Proh and Excise vs Kola Annavaram	13 Dec 2025	Order	—
CC/425/2025	Proh and Excise Sub-Inspector vs Penke Raju	13 Dec 2025	Order	—
CC/426/2025	Proh and Excise Sub-Inspector vs Maddi Yesu	13 Dec 2025	Order	—
CC/427/2025	Proh and Excise Sub-Inspector vs Arava Phanindra Kumar	13 Dec 2025	Order	—
CC/428/2025	Proh and Excise Sub-Inspector vs Bollam Koteswara Rao	13 Dec 2025	Order	—
CC/429/2025	Proh and Excise Sub-Inspector vs Guttula Janaki Ramayya	13 Dec 2025	Order	—
CC/430/2025	Proh and Excise Sub-Inspector vs Namana Jayaraju	13 Dec 2025	Order	—
CC/431/2025	Proh and Excise Sub-Inspector vs Janni Maha Lakshmi	13 Dec 2025	Order	—
CC/432/2025	Proh and Excise Sub-Inspector vs Garapati Muneswara Rao	13 Dec 2025	Order	—
CC/433/2025	Proh and Excise Sub-Inspector vs Nargani Veera Venkata Satyanarayana	13 Dec 2025	Order	—
CC/434/2025	Proh and Excise Sub-Inspector vs Bollam Venkatesulu	13 Dec 2025	Order	—
CC/435/2025	Proh and Excise Sub-Inspector vs Vetla Durga	13 Dec 2025	Order	—
CC/436/2025	Proh and Excise Sub-Inspector vs Udatala Ammiraju Gowda	13 Dec 2025	Order	—
CC/437/2025	Proh and Excise Sub-Inspector vs Vasamsetti Ganniraju	13 Dec 2025	Order	—
CC/438/2025	Proh and Excise Sub-Inspector vs Karanki Venkateswara Rao	13 Dec 2025	Order	—
CC/439/2025	Proh and Excise Sub Inspector vs Raghavaraju Satya Anjali	13 Dec 2025	Order	—
CC/440/2025	Proh and Excise Sub Inspector vs Adabala Veera Nagulu	13 Dec 2025	Order	—
CC/441/2025	Proh and Excise Sub Inspector vs Velagana Srinivasu	13 Dec 2025	Order	—
CC/442/2025	Proh and Excise Sub Inspector vs Karsinapu Rajababu	13 Dec 2025	Order	—
CC/443/2025	Proh and Excise Sub Inspector vs Vemula Chinna Srinu	13 Dec 2025	Order	—
CC/444/2025	Proh and Excise Sub Inspector vs Veeramalla Prasad	13 Dec 2025	Order	—
CC/445/2025	Proh and Excise Sub Inspector vs Veeramalla Satyanarayana	13 Dec 2025	Order	—
CC/446/2025	Proh and Excise Sub Inspector vs Vemula China Srinu	13 Dec 2025	Order	—
CC/447/2025	Proh and Excise Sub Inspector vs Muppidi Bulagani Bosubabu	13 Dec 2025	Order	—
CC/448/2025	Proh and Excise Sub Inspector vs Midde Venkateswara Rao	13 Dec 2025	Order	—
CC/449/2025	Proh and Excise Sub-Inspector vs Mannem Srinivasu	13 Dec 2025	Order	—
CC/450/2025	Proh and Excise Sub-Inspector vs Muppidi Trimurthulu	13 Dec 2025	Order	—
CC/451/2025	Proh and Excise Sub-Inspector vs Yelle Mavullayya	13 Dec 2025	Order	—
CC/452/2025	Proh and Excise Sub-Inspector vs Muppdi Hijkiyaraju	13 Dec 2025	Order	—
CC/453/2025	Proh and Excise Sub-Inspector vs Rajulapati Somaiah	13 Dec 2025	Order	—
CC/454/2025	Proh and Excise Sub-Inspector vs Rajulapati Venkateswara Rao	13 Dec 2025	Order	—
CC/455/2025	Proh and Excise Sub-Inspector vs Paka Nagamani	13 Dec 2025	Order	—
CC/456/2025	The Sub Inspector of Police vs Koyi Somaraju	13 Dec 2025	Order	—
CC/457/2025	The Sub Inspector of Police vs Gella Siva Sankar alias Kaikaram alias Prasad	13 Dec 2025	Judgement	—
CC/458/2025	The Sub Inspector of Police vs Nakka Suresh	13 Dec 2025	Order	—
CC/459/2025	Proh and Exciese Inspector vs Anasuri Nagamani	13 Dec 2025	Order	—
CC/460/2025	Proh and Exciese Inspector vs Veeravalli Veera Venkata Satyanarayana	13 Dec 2025	Order	—
CC/461/2025	Proh and Exciese Inspector vs Relangi Satyanarayna	13 Dec 2025	Order	—
CC/462/2025	Proh and Excise Inspector vs Muppidi Ananda Kumar	13 Dec 2025	Order	—
CC/463/2025	Proh and Excise Inspector vs Saladi Naga Lakshmi	13 Dec 2025	Order	—
CC/464/2025	Proh and Excise Inspector vs Nargani Seetha	13 Dec 2025	Order	—
CC/465/2025	Proh and Excise Inspector vs Sura Venkata Ratnam	13 Dec 2025	Order	—
CC/466/2025	Proh and Excise Inspector vs Borra Appa Rao	13 Dec 2025	Order	—
CC/471/2025	Proh and Excise Sub-Inspector vs Gandrothu Prasad	13 Dec 2025	Order	—
CC/472/2025	Proh and Excise Sub-Inspector vs Veeramalla Srinivasu	13 Dec 2025	Order	—

Showing 100 of 368 orders — Log in to browse all pages.

Monthly Orders (Last 12 Months)

May 2026		9
Dec 2025		165
Nov 2025		21
Oct 2025		14
Aug 2025		7
Jul 2025		146
Jun 2025		4
May 2025		3
Apr 2025		5

Frequently Asked Questions

How many cases has Shake Khwaja Rahiman handled?

Shake Khwaja Rahiman has handled 374 court orders since 2025 at Junior Civil Courts, Nidadavole. The average disposal rate is 27 orders per month.

What types of cases does Shake Khwaja Rahiman hear?

Based on available records, Shake Khwaja Rahiman primarily handles Criminal matters (Criminal Cases) and Civil matters (Original Suits, Execution Petitions) at Junior Civil Courts, Nidadavole.

Where is Shake Khwaja Rahiman currently posted?

Shake Khwaja Rahiman is posted as Principal Junior Civil Judge -cum- Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Nidadavole at Junior Civil Courts, Nidadavole, West Godavari, Andhra Pradesh.

Are judgments by Shake Khwaja Rahiman available online?

Yes. 13 judgments by Shake Khwaja Rahiman are available on Legistro with full text, outcome, and sections cited.

How fast does Shake Khwaja Rahiman dispose cases?

Shake Khwaja Rahiman disposes approximately 27 cases per month, based on 374 orders handled over their tenure at Junior Civil Courts, Nidadavole.

Since when is Shake Khwaja Rahiman serving?

Shake Khwaja Rahiman has been serving at Junior Civil Courts, Nidadavole since 2025. and is currently posted there.

Case Types

CC 67%

OS 22%

EP 4%

MC 3%

STC 2%

DVC 1%

PRC 0%

Posting History

May 2026 — Present

Principal Junior Civil Judge -cum- Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Nidadavole
May 2026 — Present

I Additional Junior Civil Judge -cum- I Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Nidadavole · 9 orders
Oct 2025 — Dec 2025

Principal Junior Civil Judge -cum- Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Nidadavole · 116 orders
Oct 2025 — Dec 2025

I Additional Junior Civil Judge -cum- I Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Nidadavole · 84 orders
Mar 2025 — Aug 2025

Principal Junior Civil Judge -cum- Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Nidadavole · 93 orders
Mar 2025 — Aug 2025

I Additional Junior Civil Judge -cum- I Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Nidadavole · 72 orders

Outcomes on Record

Petition Dismissed 1

Compromised 1

← View all judges at Junior Civil Courts, Nidadavole