Smt.T.Madhavi

1

OS.No.1119 of 2019

IN THE COURT OF THE PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE,

RANGA REDDY DISTRICT, AT L.B.NAGAR

PRESENT: SMT. T. MADHAVI,

PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE,

RANGA REDDY DISTRICT.

Dated on this the 12th day of November, 2020

OS.No. 1119 of 2019

Between:

1. Ayyagari Bapi Raja Sharma, S/o. Late A. Shivaji Sharma, Aged about 70 years, Occ: Nil, R/o. 1-9-131, Road No. 7A, Dilsukhnagar, R.R.District.

2. Smt. A. Ramasithamba, W/o. Basavaraju Venkata Narasimha Rao, Aged about 64 years, Occ: House wife, R/o. 4-12-850, Plot No. 117, Dwarakamai Nagar, Near Kamala Nagar Bus stop, Vanasthalipuram, Hyderabad. … Plaintiffs

AND

1. K. Sandeep Kumar, S/o. Sudershan, Aged about 28 years, Occ: Business, R/o.H.No. 4-2-93, Mala Basthi, Old Road, Hayathnagar, R.R.District 501505.

2. To whomsoever it may concern. … Defendants

CLAIM : This suit is filed for Declaration of Legal Heirs.

This suit is coming before me on 30.09.2020 for final hearing in the presence of Sri V. Sanjeev Goud, Advocate for the Plaintiffs and of Sri R. Ravinder, Advocate for Defendant No.1 reported no written statement and defendant No.2 were set exparte and having stood over for consideration till this day, the Court delivered the following :

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

This is a suit for Declaration to declare the Plaintiff Nos.1 & 2 as

Legal heirs for deceased A.Madhana Gopala Krishna, who died on 14.9.2018.

2.As per the plaint, the mother of plaintiffs Ayyagari Kannari purchased open Plot No.89, admeasuring 250 Sq.yrds., forming part of

Sy.No.88 at Almasguda Village of Saroornagar Mandal, under registered

Sale deed No.11948/2005. Its earlier owner died on 30.05.2008 leaving behind the plaintiff and one A. Madhana Gopala Krishna as her legal heirs and successors. The plaintiffs and said A. Madhana Gopala

Krishna filed the suit to declare them as Legal heirs and successors

before the Hon’ble IX Addl. Senior Civil Judge, R.R.District vide

OS.No.2231/2017 and the same was decreed by declaring them as Legal

heirs of Ayyagari Kannari.

2.1.After obtaining decree the plaintiffs entered into an Agreement of

Sale and the brother of the plaintiffs A.Madhana Gopala Krishna died on 14.09.2018 by leaving the plaintiffs as his legal heirs and successors as he had no issues as he took mutual divorce from his wife Ayyagari Uma

before the Lok Adalat at Suryapet vide OP No.12/2008. Said Madhana

Gopala Krishna was having only 1/3rd share in the above said property out of which these plaintiffs are entitled 2/3rd share, hence due to death of Madhana Gopala Krishna his 1/3rd share is succeeded by these plaintiffs. After the death of Madhana Gopala Krishna, the plaintiffs entered into an Agreement of sale with defendant No.1. But, he has 3

OS.No.1119 of 2019

demanded Legal heir certificate from Civil Court to go for registration.

Hence, they approached this Court.

3.After numbering the suit, summons were issued to defendant No.1 and a publication was issued towards defendant No.2. On 2.3.2020 defendant No.1 came on record through his counsel and reported no written statement by endorsing the same on his Vakalat. As none appeared towards defendant No.2 it was set exparte on 20.2.2020.

4.On behalf of the Plaintiff Nos.1 & 2, Plaintiff No.1 got examined himself as PW1 and got marked Exs.A1 to A9.

5.Heard the counsel for plaintiff.

6.Now the point for consideration is, “Whether this suit is entitled to be decreed as prayed for or not ?”

7.POINT :

The gist of the case of the plaintiffs is that one Ayyagari Kannari, who is mother of the plaintiff and Late A. Madhana Gopala Krishna. She died on 30.5.2008 leaving behind these plaintiffs and the deceased

Madhana Gopala Krishna as her legal heirs and successors. On that they filed OS.2231/2017, on the file of Hon’ble IX Addl. Senior Civil

Judge and the same was decreed. Said Madhana Gopala Krishna and

his wife took mutual Divorce in OP.No.12 of 2008 on the file of Hon’ble

Lok Adalath, Suryapet. Subsequently he died on 14.9.2018 leaving behind the plaintiff as his sole legal heir and successor. After the death of said A. Madhana Gopala Krishna, these plaintiffs entered into an agreement of sale in respect of the suit schedule property with defendant No.1 and he has demanded legal heir certificate from competent Civil Court.

8.With the said pleadings the plaintiff No.1 entered into witness box as PW1 and got marked Ex.A1 to A9. Ex.A1 is Death certificate of

A.Madhana Gopala Krishna, issued from Meeseva showing his date of death dt.14.9.2018. Ex.A2 is Certified copy of Judgment and decree in

OS.No.2231/2017 on the file of Hon’ble IX Additional Senior Civil Judge,

R.R.District at L.B.Nagar, dt.8.6.2018. Ex.A3 is Certified copy of registered Sale deed No.11948/2005, Ex.A4 is certified copy of Award in

OS.No.12 of 2008 on the file of Hon’ble Senior Civil Judge, before Lok

Adalath bench at Suryapet, wherein Ayyagari Madhana Gopala Krishna and Ayyagari Uma were petitioners. As per the terms of compromise

Ayyagari Madhana Gopala Krishna agreed and paid an amount of

Rs.60,000/- to the petitioner No.2/Uma towards her future and permanent alimony and petitioner No.2/Uma agreed that she received the said amount from petitioner No.1 towards her future and permanent alimony. It was also submitted there, that, petitioner No.2 Uma undertakes that she has no right over the person and the properties of the petitioner No.1 in future and also petitioner No.2 undertakes that she is relinquished all her rights against the person and properties of petitioner No.1. Ex.A5 is Market value certificate dt.6.11.2019, Ex.A6 is

Encumbrance certificate dt.6.11.2019 and Ex.A7 to A9 are certified true copies of Aadhar cards of Plaintiff Nos.1, 2 and deceased Gopala Krishna.

5

OS.No.1119 of 2019

9.With the above said material the plaintiffs tried to their level best to prove that as the deceased A. Madhana Gopala Krishna had no family and he died intestate leaving behind these plaintiff Nos.1 & 2 as his sole legal heirs. Ex.A4 is clearly showing that the divorced wife of

A. Madhana Gopala Krishna had relinquished all her rights in respect of her husband and there is no single whisper with regard to the children between them on which this court suo-motto reopened the matter for hearing about the same.

10.On 9.11.2020, the counsel for plaintiff and Plaintiff No.1 appeared

before this court and requested to post the matter on 10.11.2020. On

10.11.2020 the plaintiff filed a memo along with copies of letters between

A. Madhana Gopala Krishna and the parents of his wife Uma and orally represented that as after the marriage Uma has not joined the conjugal society of her husband, hence they mutually took divorce. Therefore, there is no question of children between them. Recorded the same.

11.From the memo and correspondence letter filed by the plaintiff on 10.11.2020 that the deceased A. Madhana Gopala Krishna requested his inlaws on several occasions to send his wife to his house to lead matrimonial life and also to attend several customs by his wife and finally their relationship ended with mutual divorce. Therefore, the ambiguity raised in the mind of the court, whether the deceased

A. Madhana Gopala Krishna had any children through his wife Uma is clarified, hence there is no hurdle to believe the case of the plaintiffs about the matrimonial life of deceased A. Madhana Gopala Krishna.

12. In the above said background, as the defendant No.1, who questioned the legal entity of this plaintiff Nos.1 & 2 as Legal heirs of deceased A. Madhana Gopala Krishna not appeared before this court till today by contesting the suit, the evidence of PW1 and the contents of

Exs.A1 to A9 are remained unchallenged and unshaken by proving the case of the plaintiffs that they are surviving legal heirs of deceased

A.Madhana Gopala Krishna. Point is answered accordingly.

13. IN THE RESULT, the suit is decreed declaring that the Plaintiff

Nos.1 and 2 are the Legal heirs of deceased A. Madhana Gopala Krishna, who died on 14.9.2018 and this judgment is only with regard to the declaration of Legal status of parties and not for any other purpose.

Dictated to the Personal Assistant, translated by her, corrected and

pronounced by me in Open Court, this the 12th day of November, 2020.

PRL.JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE

R.R. DISTRICT AT L.B.NAGAR

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

WITNESSES EXAMINED

FOR PLAINTIFFS : FOR DEFENDANTS :

PW1 : Sri.Ayyagari Bapi Raja SharmaNONE

FOR PLAINTIFFS :

Ex.A1 Death certificate of A.Madhana Gopala Krishna, issued from

Meeseva dt.23.2.2019

Ex.A2 Certified copy of Judgment and decree in OS.No.2231/2017 on the file of IX Addl. Senior Civil Judge, dt.8.6.2018.

7

OS.No.1119 of 2019

Ex.A3 Certified copy of registered Sale deed No.11948/2005, dt.15.10.2005

Ex.A4 Certified copy of Lokadalat at Suryapet vide OP.No.12/2008, dt.4.7.2009

Ex.A5 Market value certificate issued by Sub Registrar, dt.6.11.2019

Ex.A6 Encumbrance certificate dt.6.11.2019

Ex.A7 Certified True copy of Aadhar card of Ayyagari Bapi Raja

Sharma vide No. 7503 1570 1141

Ex.A8 Certified True copy of Aadhar card of A. Ramasithamba vide No. 6834 7668 9696

Ex.A9 Certified True copy of Aadhar card of Madhana Gopala Krishna

Ayyagari vide No. 9510 0536 9060

FOR DEFENDANTS : NIL

PRL.JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE,

R.R. DISTRICT AT L.B.NAGAR.

1

IN THE COURT OF THE V ADDITIONAL METROPOLITAN

MAGISTRATE CUM V ADDITIONAL JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE

CYBERABAD, AT L.B. NAGAR

PRESENT:- Smt N.Hema Latha, FAC V Addl. Metropolitan Magistrate Cum V Addl. Junior Civil Judge Cyberabad, At L.B. Nagar.

DATED ON THIS THE 13 th DAY OF JUNE, 2019

C.C. No.331/2016

State through WPS Saroornagar… Complainant

A N D

A1. V.Venkarama Subrahmanyam A2.V.Venkata Padmanaba Murthy A3.V.Naga Laxmi … Accused The case against A2 is abated.

a) Serial Number of the case : 331/2016

b) Date of commission of offence :

c) Name of the complainant : State through WPS Saroornagar

d) Name of the accused person, :A1.V.Venkatarama Subrahmanyam, S/o. his parentage and residence Vemuri Venkata Padmanabha Murthy Aged 29 years, Occ:Pvt employee A2.A2.V.Venkata Padmanaba Murthy,s/o. V.Venkatarama Subrahmanyam Aged 50 years, Occ:Pvt employee A3.V.Naga Lakshmi, W/o.V.Venkata Padmanabha Murthy Aged 45 years, Occ:House wife A1 to A3 are R/o.H.No.2-2-1144/9, Flat no.102, Sri Raghavendra Nilayam beside Brahmanyam Hotel, New Nallakunta, Hyderabad

e) Offence complained of : U/s.498-A, 406, 506 of IPC and Sec 3 & 4 of DP Act

f) Plea of the accused on their examination : Not guilty

g) Final Order : Accused are acquitted

h) Date of order : 13-06-2019 2

This case came before me for final hearing in the presence of the

Asst. Public Prosecutor for the State and Sri K.Rama Krishna counsel for the accused and having stood over for consideration till this day, the court delivered the following.

J U D G M E N T

1.The SHO of WPS Saroornagar laid charge sheet against the accused in Cr.No.145/16 seeking to punish them for the offences punishable U/s.498-A, 406, 506 of IPC and Sec 3 & 4 of DP Act.

2. The prosecution case in nutshell is that on 05.07.2016 at 1000 hours the SHO of WPS Saroornagar received a complaint from the defacto complainant Smt.D.Sri Lakshmi, in which she stated that her marriage was performed with one V.Venkata Rama Subramanyam on 22.04.2015 at Sri Padmavathi Srinivasa Kalyana Mandapam, Rythu

Bazaar, Kothapet. At the time of her marriage her parents gave

Rs.6,00,000/- cash towards varakatnam, Rs.2 lakhs worth gold and

Rs.75,000/- towards silver, Rs.2 lakhs towards clothes and Rs.1 lakh for miscellaneous expenditure. Her engagement expenditure was approximately Rs.2,20,000/- and Rs.4 lakhs was her marriage expenditure. After the marriage she joined the company of her husband for the consummation of the marriage and lived happily for few weeks.

Subsequently her mother-in-law started harassing her to bring

additional dowry from her parents for buying a house and her father-in-

law and her husband used to support her mother-in-law. On 23.02.2016 she was suffering with high fever, they did not care for her and her husband pushed her out of the house with his hands and ordered her that she should take treatment at her parents house and demanded her to transfer the house on their name. All her belongings which was given by her father at the time of the marriage were kept with them and necked her out of the house. since then she is staying at her parents house. Her elders and parents tried to convince the matter, but her 3 inlaws did not heed to their words and demanded to transfer the house of her father on her husband’s name. On 06.06.2016 her parents and two persons went to her inlaws house Then she lodged a complaint.

On the basis of above complaint LW7-Sri S.Buchaiah,

Inspector of Police registered a case against accused in Cr.No.145/2016.

During the course of the investigation she examined and recorded the statements of Lws 1 to 6 and he issued 41(A) Cr.P.C notice to the accused A1 to A3. After the completion of the investigation she filed the charge sheet against the accused.

3.This court has taken case into cognizance against the accused for the offences punishable U/s.498-A, 406, 506 of IPC and Sec 3 & 4 of DP Act.

4.After the appearance of the accused, the copies of the documents as contemplated U/s.207 of Cr.P.C. was furnished to them.

5. The accused were examined U/s.239 Cr.P.C. charges for the offences U/s.498-A, 406, 506 of IPC and Sec 3 & 4 of DP Act framed and the contents were read over and explained to the accused for which they pleaded not guilty and preferred a trial.

6.In order to establish its case the prosecution examined PW1 and got marked Ex.P1 to P4.

7. Since PW1, the defacto complainant and victim did not depose anything against them and there is no incriminating material available against them. Hence examination U/s.313 of Cr.P.C is dispensed with.

8. Heard both sides.

9. Now the point for determination is whether the prosecution could prove the guilt of the accused for the offence punishable U/s.498-A, 406 of IPC and Sec 3 & 4 of DP Act.?

10. POINT:-The case of the prosecution is that the accused persons harassed the complainant physically and mentally for additional dowry 4 and necked her out of the house.

11.To prove the same the prosecution examined PW1-Smt.D.Sri

Laxmi, who is the complainant, PW2-D.Shankar, who is the father of

PW1. The learned A.P.P. has given up the evidence of Lws 3 to LW7.

12.As seen from the evidence PW1, who is the complainant deposed her marriage was performed with Accused No.1 on 22.04.2015 at Srinivasa Kalyana Mandapam. After the marriage she joined the company of her husband at her inlaws house at Nallakunta and lived happily for two months. Thereafter petty disputes arose between them.

Then they approached elders, who held panchayath and gave complaint by obtaining her signature on the complaint. She doesn’t know the contents of the complaint.

PW2 is the father of PW1 deposed on 22.04.2015 PW1 marriage was performed with A1 at Srinivasa Kalyana Mandapam. After the marriage Pw1 joined with A1 at the house of her in laws at

Nallakunta and lived happily for two months. Thereafter petty disputes arose between PW1 and A1. Except this she doesn’t know about the facts of the case.

PW1 and 2 declared hostile in their cross examination by

APPO, no material facts were elicited in support of the prosecution. They clearly stated PW1 entered into compromise with A1 and obtained mutual concerned divorce as such they are not intending to proceed further in this case.

After careful scanning of evidence both oral and documentary proof, the prosecution failed to establish the guilt of the accused, beyond all reasonable doubt. Hence benefit of doubt given to the accused.

In the result, accused A1 and A3 are found not guilty for the offences punishable U/s.498-A, 406, 506 of IPC and Sec 3 & 4 of DP Act.

Accordingly they are acquitted U/s.248(1) Cr.P.C. The bail bonds of the accused, shall stand cancelled and sureties are discharged after the 5 appeal period is over.

Dictated to the Personal Assistant, transcribed and typed by

her, corrected and pronounced by me in the open Court on this the 13th day of June, 2019.

FAC V Addl. METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE Cum

V Addl. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE

CYBERABAD, AT LB ANAGR

APPENDIX OF EVIDECE

WITNESSES EXAMINED

FOR PROSECUTION: FOR DEFENCE: PW1: V.S.V.R.Subramanyam NIL PW2: D.Shankar

EXHIBITS MARKED

FOR PROSECUTION: FOR DEFENCE: Ex.P1: Signature on the complaint NIL Ex.P2: Complaint Ex.P3: 161 Cr.P.C. Statement by PW1 Ex.P4: 161 Cr.P.C. Statement by PW2

MATERIAL OBJECTS MARKED

NIL

FAC V Addl. METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE Cum

V Addl. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE

CYBERABAD, AT LB NAGAR

6

C A L E N D A R

IN THE COURT OF THE V ADDITIONAL METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE

CUM V ADDITIONAL JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE,

CYBERABAD, AT L.B.NAGAR, RANGA REDDY DISTRICT

C.C.NO.277/2016

1Name of the Complainant State through WPS Saroornagar 2Name of the AccusedA1.Md.Younus,S/o.Md.Sarvane(late), Aged 28 years,Occ:Pvt employee A2.Smt.Jameela Begum, W/o.Md.Sarvane(late), Aged 45 years, Occ:House wife A1 and A2 are R/o.H.No.1-9-612/1, near Traffic PS,Adikmet, Nallakunta, Hyd A3.Smt.Kanees Fathima,W/o.Akbar, Aged 32 years, Occ:House wife R/o.Saidabad, Hyderabad A4.Md.Yousuf,S/o.Sarvane(late), aged 34 years, Occ:Business R/o.Near Traffic Police Station, Ramnagar Gundu, Adikmet, Hyderabad 3Offence under sectionU/s.498-A, of IPC and Sec 3&4 of DP Act 4Date of offencePrior to 06.06.2016 5Date of complaint06.06.2016 6Date of ApprehensionIssued 41(A) Cr.P.C notice 7Date of Commencement 25.01.2017 of trial

Date of closure of trial26.11.2018 9Date of Judgment27.11.2018 10Finding of the CourtAccused A1 to A4 present. Judgment

pronounced. In the result, Accused A1 to

A4 are found not guilty for the offences punishable U/s.498-A of IPC and Sec 3 & 4 of DP Act. Accordingly they are acquitted U/s.248(1) Cr.P.C. The bail bonds of the accused, shall stand cancelled and sureties are discharged after the appeal period is over.

11Reasons for delay in-- disposal of case

V Addl. Metropolitan Magistrate, Cum V Addl. Junior Civil Judge, Cyberabad at L.B.Nagar Copy To:

The Hon’ble Metropolitan Sessions Judge, Cyberabad, R.R.District.

1

O.S.No.815 of 2019

IN THE COURT OF THE PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE,

RANGA REDDY DISTRICT, AT L.B.NAGAR

PRESENT: SMT. T. MADHAVI,

PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE,

RANGA REDDY DISTRICT.

DATED ON THIS THE 05th DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2020

OS 815 of 2019

Between:-

1. Baddam Vijaya, W/o Late. Baddam Venugopal Goud, Aged about 36 years, Occ: House hold,

2. Baddam Shiva Shanker Goud, S/o Late. Baddam Venugopal Goud, Aged about 30 years, Occ: Pvt Employee,

3. Baddam Abhilash, S/o Late. Baddam Venugopal Goud, Aged about 29 years, Occ: Pvt Employee,

4. Baddam Bhanu Goud, S/o Late. Baddam Venugopal Goud, Aged about 24 years, Occ: Pvt Employee,

5. Baddam Tejaswini, D/o Late. Baddam Venugopal Goud, Aged about 16 years, Occ: Student, (Petitioner No.5 being minor rep by Petitioner No.1 her mother and natural guardian)

All are R/o. H.No. 2-3-232, Adarsh Nagar Colony, Nagole, Hayathnagar, Ranga Reddy Dist. … Plaintiffs

AND

1. The Tahsildar, Uppal Mandal, Ranga Reddy District.

2. All Concerned. … Defendants

This suit is coming on 28.09.2020 for final hearing before me in the presence of Sri A Manik Prabhu Goud, Learned Advocate for the Plaintiffs and Defendants No.1 & 2 were remained Ex-parte and having perused the material papers available on record, this Court delivered the following:

2

O.S.No.815 of 2019

J U D G M E N T

This is a suit for declaration, to declare the Plaintiff Nos.1 to 5 as

Legal heirs of deceased Baddam Venu Gopal goud who died on 9.6.2018.

2.The Brief averments of the plaint are as follows:

2.1.Plaintiff No.1 is wife, Plaintiff Nos.2 to 4 are sons and daughter of deceased Baddam Venu Gopal Goud. Venu Gopal Goud was absolute owner and possessor of House property bearing No.2-3-231 in Sy.No.105, adm., 960 Sq.yrds at Adarsha Nagar colony, Nagole village. He acquired the same by virtue of partition vide OS.No.124/2018 on the file of Hon’ble

III ADJ, R.R.District at L.B.Nagar and it was filed by his brother Baddam

Jagan Goud. It was settled before Hon’ble Lok Adalath bench and Award was passed accordingly. On 9.6.2018 Baddam Venu Gopal Goud died intestate by leaving these plaintiffs. Originally the property was mutated in the name of Grandfather of Plaintiff Nos.2 to 5 i.e., Baddam

Venkataiah alias Venkata Swamy in Municipal records. But due to lack of Knowledge Baddam Venu Gopal not mutated the property though allotted through Hon’ble Lok Adalath Award on 28.3.2018. Baddam Venu

Gopal Goud lastly resided in H.No.2-3-232, Adarsha Nagar colony and died intestate leaving behind the plaintiffs as his only legal heirs and successors.

2.2.The plaintiffs approached defendant No.1 on 4.9.2019 for issuance of Legal heir certificate by declaring the plaintiffs as the only legal heirs 3

O.S.No.815 of 2019

and successors of deceased Baddam Venu Gopal Goud. But Defendant

No.1 refused, denied and advised to approach the Civil Court for obtaining Legal heir certificate. Hence they filed this suit.

3.After numbering the suit, summons were issued to defendant No.1 and a publication was issued to defendant No.2/All concerned. None appeared and claimed for defendant No.2 and AGP came on record for defendant No.1. Subsequently, no written statement was filed by defendant No.1, hence he was set exparte on 14.11.2019. On that

I.A.1514/2019 was filed by defendant No.1 for setting aside the exparte order, the same was allowed on condition to file written statement. As the defendant failed to file written statement, condition not complied, hence the said I.A was dismissed for default on 17.2.2020. Hence no contesting defendant on record.

4.In support of the case of the plaintiffs, plaintiff No.2 got examined himself as PW1 and got marked Ex.A1 to A9.

5.Heard the counsel for plaintiff.

6.Now the point for consideration is Whether this suit is entitled to be decreed as prayed for ?

7.POINT :-

The case of the plaintiffs is that deceased Baddam Venu Gopal

Goud is husband of Plaintiff No.1 and father of Plaintiff Nos.2 to 5. He died intestate on 9.6.2018 leaving behind these plaintiff Nos.1 to 5 as his 4

O.S.No.815 of 2019

legal heirs and successors. During the lifetime of Baddam Venu Gopal

Goud his brother filed OS.No.124/2018 on the file of Hon’ble III ADJ, in which an Award was passed before the Hon’ble Lok Adalath and he was given share of house property bearing Municipal No.2-3-231, in

Sy.No.105 at Adarsha Nagar colony, Nagole. But the said house property has been standing in the name of father of Venu Gopal Goud only. Due to lack of knowledge he has not applied for mutation of his name even after passing of Award from the Hon’ble Lok Adalath. When the plaintiffs approached the defendant No.1 for issuance of Legal heir certificate, he adviced them to approach the Civil Court.

8.With the said pleadings, plaintiff No.2 entered into witness box as

PW1 and got marked Ex.A1 to A9. Ex.A1 is Certified copy of Award in

OS.No.124/2018 on the file of Hon’ble III ADJ, R.R.District, at L.B.Nagar.

Ex.A2 is Death certificate of Baddam Venu Gopal Goud, issued from

GHMC, showing his date of death as 9.6.2018. Ex.A3 to A8 are original

Aadhar Cards of Late Baddam Venu Gopal Goud and Plaintiff Nos.1 to 5 with the following numbers 1. 8023 8416 8540, 2. 3544 6033 1180, 3.

5820 8066 9583, 4. 7427 6212 8862, 5. 5365 2856 4279 and 6. 5843 1812 6188. Ex.A9 original property tax receipt for Door No.2-3-232,

Nagole in the name of B. Venkataiah.

9.From the above material on record, plaintiffs tried to their level best to establish their case that Plaintiff No.1 is wife and Plaintiff Nos.2 to 4 are children of Late Baddam Venu Gopal Goud and he died intestate. If really any third person is having any interest either with the family of the 5

O.S.No.815 of 2019

plaintiff or having any relationship with the deceased Baddam Venu

Gopal Goud, they would have appeared before this court and contest the matter but till today none appeared and disproved the case of the plaintiff. Therefore, the evidence of PW1 and the contents of Exs.A1 to A9 are remained unchallenged and unshaken and proved the case of the plaintiffs that they are the sole Legal heirs of deceased Baddam Venu

Gopal Goud. Point is answered accordingly.

10.IN THE RESULT, the suit is decreed partly, by declaring the plaintiff

Nos.1 to 5 as legal heirs of late Baddam Venu Gopal Goud, who died on 9.6.2018. This Judgment is only with regard to declaration of Legal status of Plaintiff Nos.1 to 5 only but not for any other purpose.

Typed to my dictation by Steno, corrected and pronounced by me in Open Court, this the 05th day of November, 2020.

PRL.JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE,

R.R. DISTRICT AT L.B.NAGAR.

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

WITNESSES EXAMINED

For Plaintiffs: For Defendants:

PW1: Sri Baddam Shiva Shanker Goud -none-

EXHIBITS MARKED

For Plaintiffs:

Ex.A1: Certified copy of Award passed in OS No.124 of 2018 on the file of

Hon’ble III Addl. District Judge, R.R.District at L.B.Nagar before

Lok Adalath, dt.28.3.2018

Ex.A2: Death Certificate of Baddam Venu Gopal Goud issued by GHMC, circle III, dt.9.6.2018 6

O.S.No.815 of 2019

Ex.A3: Aadhar card of Late Baddam Venu Gopal Goud vide

No.8023 8416 8540

Ex.A4: Aadhar card of Late Baddam Vijaya vide No.3544 6033 1180

Ex.A5: Aadhar card of Baddam Shiva Shanker Goud vide

No.5820 8066 9583

Ex.A6: Aadhar card of Baddam Abhilash vide No.7427 6212 8862

Ex.A7: Aadhar card of Baddam Bhanu Goud vide

No.5365 2856 4279

Ex.A8: Aadhar card of Baddam Tejaswini vide

No.5843 1812 6188

Ex.A9 Original Property tax receipt in the name of B. Venkataiah,

Door No. 2-3-232, Nagole (2018-2019), dt.20.03.2019

For Defendants :- NIL

PRL.JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE,

R.R. DISTRICT AT L.B.NAGAR.

1

O.S.No.08 of 2020

IN THE COURT OF THE PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE,

RANGA REDDY DISTRICT, AT L.B.NAGAR

PRESENT: SMT. T. MADHAVI,

PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE,

RANGA REDDY DISTRICT.

DATED ON THIS THE 06th DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2020

OS No. 08 of 2020

Between:-

1. Smt. Kunapuli Laxmi Bala Suguna, W/o.Late. Kunapuli Venkata Surya Bhagavanlu, Aged about 71 years, Occ: House Wife,

2. Smt. K. Naga Padmaja, D/o. Late. Kunapuli Venkata Surya Bhagavanlu, W/o. B. Naga Venkata Bhaskar Rao, Aged about 49 years, Occ: Housewife,

3. Sri. Kunapuli L.S.V. Prasad, S/o. Late. Kunapuli Venkata Surya Bhagavanlu, Aged about 48 years, Occ: Employee,

4. Sri. Kunapuli Jayaram Bharadwaj, S/o. Late. Kunapuli Venkata Surya Bhagavanlu, Aged about 38 years, Occ: Employee,

All are R/o H.No. 20-117/18E, Tirumala Nagar Colony, Near Sharadha Theater, Saroornagar, R.R.District. … Plaintiffs

AND

1. Tahsildar Saroornagar Mandal, Saroornagr, Ranga Reddy Dist.

2. All Concerned. … Defendants

This suit is coming on 01.10.2020 for final hearing before me in the presence of Sri V. Aravinda Rao, Learned Advocate for the Plaintiffs and

Defendants No.1 to 2 were remained Ex-parte and having perused the material papers available on record, this Court delivered the following:

2

O.S.No.08 of 2020

J U D G M E N T

This is a suit for declaration, declaring the Plaintiff Nos.1 to 4 as

Legal heirs of Late Kunapuli Venkata Surya Bhagavanlu in respect of suit schedule property.

2.The Brief averments of the plaint are as follows:

2.1.The Plaintiff No.1 is wife and Plaintiff Nos.2 to 4 are children of Late

Kunapuli Venkata Surya Bhagavanlu, who died on 25.10.2017. During his lifetime he was absolute owner and exclusive possessor of Plot No.11 in Sy.No.50, admeasuring 368.9 Sq.yrds at Mansoorabad Village,

Saroornagar Mandal. As he purchased the same from Maganti

Ramamohana Rao and 6 others through registered GPA holder

Sri.Maganti Ramamohana Rao, under registered Sale deed

No.1504/1968. Since the date of purchase he was an absolute owner and possessor of said property. As he died on 25.10.2017 these plaintiffs became owners of said property by virtue of succession. On 12.11.2019 the plaintiff approached defendant no.1 by making an application requesting to mutate the schedule property on their names and to declare them as legal heirs of deceased Kunapuli Venkata Surya Bhagavanlu.

But the defendant No.1 adviced the plaintiffs to approach the Civil court to obtain legal heirs certificate. As the plaintiffs are Successors and Legal heirs of Late Kunapuli Venkata Surya Bhagavanlu in respect of suit schedule property, hence they filed this suit.

3

O.S.No.08 of 2020

3.After numbering the suit, summons were issued to defendant No.1 and a publication was issued for defendant No.2. The AGP appeared on record for defendant No.1 and reported no objection on 5.3.2020. None appeared for defendant No.2.

4.In support of the case of the plaintiffs, plaintiff No.1 got examined himself as PW1 and got marked Ex.A1 to A10.

5.Heard the counsel for plaintiff.

6.Now the point for consideration is “Whether the suit is entitled to be decreed as prayed for or not?”

7.POINT :-

As per the pleadings of the plaint, chief examination affidavit and contents of PW1 and the arguments of her counsel, the husband of

Plaintiff No.1 and father of Plaintiff Nos.2 to 4 Late Kunapuli Venkata

Surya Bhagavanlu, died intestate on 25.10.2017 by leaving these plaintiffs as his sole legal heirs and successors to this suit schedule property which he purchased under registered Sale deed No. 1504/1968.

When the Plaintiff approached defendant No.1 on 12.11.2019 to mutate their names as legal heirs of deceased in respect of the suit schedule property by issuing legal heir certificate, he denied and adviced them to approach the Civil Court.

4

O.S.No.08 of 2020

8.With the said pleadings, PW1 reiterated the contents of plaint in her chief examination affidavit and got marked Exs.A1 to A10.

Ex.A1 is Death Certificate of Kunapuli Venkata Surya Bhagavanlu, issued from Meeseva showing his date of death as 24.10.2017. Ex.A2 is

Certified copy of registered Sale deed No.1504/1968, Ex.A3 to A6 are

Aadhar Cards of Plaintiff Nos.1 to 4, Ex.A7 is Market value certificate,

Exs.A8 to A10 are Encumbrance Certificates issued from Meeseva for different periods from 1.1.1968 to 7.5.2019.

9.By relying on the contents of Exs.A1 to A10 the plaintiffs tried to prove their case that they are the only surviving legal heirs of deceased

Kunapuli Venkata Surya Bhagavanlu. As the defendant No.1 reported no objection and as none came and contest the matter for defendant No.2, the evidence of PW1 remained unchallenged and unshaken by proving the case of the plaintiffs that they are the sole Legal heirs of deceased

Kunapuli Venkata Surya Bhagavanlu.

10.At this stage, it is relevant to discuss here that under the shield of legal heirs the plaintiffs are seeking two different reliefs i.e., declaring them as Legal heirs of deceased Kunapuli Venkata Surya Bhagavanlu and also to declare them as successors of deceased Kunapuli Venkata Surya

Bhagavanlu in respect of suit schedule property. To the extent of declaring them as Legal heirs the suit can be decreed, but to the aspect of declaring them as Successors of Late Kunapuli Venkata Surya

Bhagavanluin respect of this suit schedule property, this court cannot 5

O.S.No.08 of 2020

proceed further, as the aspect of deciding the succession of the plaintiffs in respect of suit schedule property comes under the purview of Indian

Succession Act, on which this court is not having jurisdiction. Hence, the suit can be decreed partly by declaring them as Legal heirs of deceased

Kunapuli Venkata Surya Bhagavanlu and the suit in respect of declaring them as successors of Kunapuli Venkata Surya Bhagavanlu in respect of this suit schedule property, the suit is liable to be dismissed. Point is answered accordingly.

11.IN THE RESULT, the suit is decreed partly by declaring the Plaintiff

Nos.1 to 3 as Legal heirs of deceased Late Kunapuli Venkata Surya

Bhagavanlu, who died on 25.10.2017 and the suit in respect of declaring the Plaintiff Nos.1 to 3 as Successors to succeed the suit schedule property the suit is dismissed without costs.

Dictated to the Personal Assistant, transacted by her, corrected and

pronounced by me in Open Court, this the 06th day of November, 2020.

PRL.JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE,

R.R. DISTRICT AT L.B.NAGAR.

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

WITNESSES EXAMINED

For Plaintiffs: For Defendants:

PW1: Smt.Kunapuli Laxmi Bala Suguna -none- 6

O.S.No.08 of 2020

EXHIBITS MARKED

For Plaintiffs:

Ex.A1: Death certificate of Kunapuli Venkata Surya Bhagavanlu issued from GHMC, circle 03, dt.24.11.2017

Ex.A2: Certified copy of Sale deed Doc.No.1504/1968 issued from

Sub Registrar, Hyderabad East with translated copy, dt.28.3.1968

Ex.A3: Aadhar card of Plaintiff No.1 vide No. 5935 0527 7414

Ex.A4: Aadhar card of Plaintiff No.2 vide No. 7600 5927 9580

Ex.A5: Aadhar card of Plaintiff No.3 vide No. 4449 0798 6342

Ex.A6: Aadhar card of Plaintiff No.4 vide No. 4303 1450 1699

Ex.A7: Market value certificate issued by Sub registrar, Saroornagar, dt.21.6.2019

Ex.A8: Encumbrance certificate for the period from 01.01.1968 to 31.12.1982, dt.9.5.2019

Ex.A9: Encumbrance certificate for the period from 01.01.1983 to 30.04.1995, dt.9.5.2019

Ex.A10: Encumbrance certificate for the period from 01.05.1995 to 07.05.2019, dt.8.5.2019

For Defendants :- NIL

PRL.JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE,

R.R. DISTRICT AT L.B.NAGAR.

Read BY: P Compared By: M

1

O.S.No.09 of 2020

IN THE COURT OF THE PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE,

RANGA REDDY DISTRICT, AT L.B.NAGAR

PRESENT: SMT. T. MADHAVI,

PRL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE,

RANGA REDDY DISTRICT.

DATED ON THIS THE 06th DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2020

OS No. 09 of 2020

Between:-

1. Kumari. Allam Chaitanya, D/o.Late Allam Subba Rao, Aged 42 years, Occ: Private Employee,

2. Kumari. Allam Lavanya, D/o. Late Allam Subba Rao, Aged : 34 years, Occ: Business,

Both are R/o. H.No. 10-2-289/27, Shanthi Sagar Apartments, Shanthi Nagar, Masab Tank, Asif Nagar, Hyderabad – 28. … Plaintiffs

AND

1. Tahsildar Saroornagar Mandal, Saroornagr, Ranga Reddy Dist.

2. All Concerned. … Defendants

This suit is coming on 03.09.2020 for final hearing before me in the presence of Sri V. Aravinda Rao, Learned Advocate for the Plaintiffs and

Defendants No.1 to 2 were remained Ex-parte and having perused the material papers available on record, this Court delivered the following:

J U D G M E N T

This is a suit for declaring the Plaintiff Nos.1 to 3 as Legal heirs of

Late Allam Padmavathi and owners of suit schedule property being successors of Late Allam Padmavathi in respect of suit schedule property.

2

O.S.No.09 of 2020

2.The Brief averments of the plaint are as follows:

2.1.As per the averments of the plaint the mother of the plaintiff Allam

Padmavathi was absolute owner and exclusive possessor of House

No.9-5-90 on Plot No.20 in Sy.No.2/1, 2/2 and 2/3, admeasuring 300

Sq.yrds at SBI Colony, Champapet of Saroornagar Mandal. As he purchased the same from The State Bank of India Staff Co-operative

Housing Society Ltd., Rep., by its President Sri. P.Prakash Raju. But the

Plot number and House number was wrongly mentioned in the sale deed, hence a Rectification deed was executed on 27.12.2019 vide

Doc.No.21130/2019 of Bk.I, at Sub-Registrar office, Champapet. The

Plaintiff Nos.1 & 2 are daughters of said Allam Padmavathi, who died on 3.6.2013 intestate, leaving behind these Plaintiff Nos.1 & 2 as her legal heirs and from the date of her death they became owners of suit schedule property by virtue of Succession. The husband of Padmavathi predeceased her. On 18.11.2019 the plaintiffs approached defendant

No.1 by giving an application and requested to mutate the schedule property on their names and to declare them as Legal heirs of deceased.

But, defendant No.1 adviced the plaintiffs to approach the Civil Court to obtain Legal heir Certificate. Hence they filed this suit.

3.After numbering the suit, summons were issued to defendant No.1 and a publication was issued to defendant No.2. On 19.2.2020 defendant

No.1 came on record but on 6.3.2020 reported no written statement.

Hence it was set exparte.

3

O.S.No.09 of 2020

4.In support of the case of the plaintiffs, plaintiff No.1 got examined as PW1 and got marked Exs.A1 to A6.

5.Heard the counsel for plaintiff.

6.Now the point for consideration is “Whether the suit is entitled to be decreed as prayed for or not” ?

7.POINT :-

The gist of the case of the plaintiff is that, one Allam Padmavathi

W/o. Allam Subba Rao, is mother of Plaintiff Nos.1 & 2. The said Subba

Rao predeceased Allam Padmavathi and Allam Padmavathi died on 3.6.2013, leaving behind these Plaintiff Nos.1 & 2 as her sole surviving

Legal heirs and successors to succeed the suit schedule property which she purchased under registered Sale deed No. 2240/2010 on 20.11.2010.

When the plaintiff approached the defendant No.1 by giving an application requesting to mutate the suit schedule property on their names and to declare them as Legal heirs of deceased Allam Padmavathi, for that defendant No.1 refused the same and adviced to approach the

Civil Court.

8.With the said pleadings, Plaintiff No.2 entered into witness box and got examined as PW1 and reiterated the contents of plaint in her chief examination affidavit. She got marked Exs.A1 to A6, i.e., Ex.A1 is Death 4

O.S.No.09 of 2020

certificate of Allam Padmavathi, issued by GHMC through Meeseva by showing the date of death of Padmavathi as 3-6-2013. Ex.A2 is Certified copy of registered Sale deed No.2240/2010 and Ex.A3 is Certified copy of

Rectification deed No.21130/2019, Ex.A4 & A5 are original Aadhar Cards of Plaintiff Nos.1 & 2 and Ex.A6 is Encumbrance certificate issued from

Sub-Registrar, Champapet for the period from 1.5.1995 to 29.12.2019.

9.In the above said pleadings, the plaintiff tried to establish their case that both of them are the sole surviving Legal heirs and their mother

Allam Padmavathi, as she died intestate they became the successors of their mother in respect of this suit schedule property. But under the shield of Legal heirs the plaintiffs have tried to get the relief of successors of their deceased mother Allam Padmavathi in respect of this suit schedule property. But the said aspect of declaring them as successors of

Allam Padmavathi in respect of this suit schedule property will come into the purview of Indian Succession Act, on which this court has not having jurisdiction to decide the issue of succession of the plaintiffs on the death of their mother in respect of this suit schedule property. Therefore, this suit can be decreed only in the aspect of declaring the plaintiffs as sole legal heirs of their deceased mother Allam Padmavathi. As in the absence of the defendants, the evidence of PW1 and the contents of Ex.A1 to A6 are remained unchallenged and unshaken. Point is answered accordingly.

5

O.S.No.09 of 2020

10.IN THE RESULT, the suit is decreed partly by declaring the Plaintiff

Nos. 1 & 2 as Legal heirs of deceased Late. Allam Padmavathi, who died 3.6.2013 and the suit in respect of declaring the plaintiff Nos.1 & 2 as

Successors of Allam Padmavathi in respect of this suit schedule property the suit is dismissed. This Judgment is only with regard to declaration of

Legal status of Plaintiff Nos.1 & 2 only but not for any other purpose.

Dictated to the Personal Assistant, transacted by her, corrected and

pronounced by me in Open Court, this the 06th day of November, 2020.

PRL.JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE,

R.R. DISTRICT AT L.B.NAGAR.

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

WITNESSES EXAMINED

For Plaintiffs: For Defendants:

PW1: Smt.Allam Lavanya -none-

EXHIBITS MARKED

For Plaintiffs:

Ex.A1: Death certificate of Late Allam Padmavathi issued by GHMC

Circle No.7, dt.21.6.2013

Ex.A2: Certified copy of Sale deed Doc.No.2240/2010 issued from

Sub Registrar, Champapet, dt.20.11.2010

Ex.A3: Certified copy of Rectification deed No.21130/2019 issued from

Sub-Registrar, Champapet.

Ex.A4: Aadhar card of Plaintiff No.1 vide No.8147 3886 2466

Ex.A5: Aadhar card of Plaintiff No.2 vide No. 7302 2924 0990

Ex.A6: Encumbrance certificate for the period from 01.05.1995 to 29.12.2019, dt.30.12.2019

For Defendants :- NIL

PRL.JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE,

R.R. DISTRICT AT L.B.NAGAR.

Read BY: P Compared By: M