Sri V.Gopalakrishna

O.S.No.257/20241Dt.03-04-2025.

IN THE COURT OF THE CIVIL JUDGE (JUNIOR DIVISION) AT SATHAVEDU.

Present: Sri V. Gopala Krishna,

Additional Civil Judge (Junior Division),

Puttur. FAC/ Civil Judge (Junior Division), Sathyavedu.

Thursday, the Third (03rd) day of April, 2025.

O. S. N O .257 / 2024.

Between:

K. Priya, Hindu, Age:35 years, W/o K. Munaiah, D.No.4-100, Bramhana Street, Nagalapuram Village and Mandal, Tirupathi District and Temporarily residing at D.No.412, near Fathima masjid, Ambedkar Nagar, Viginapura, Banglore North, Durvani Nagar, Bangalore, Karnataka State.

… Plaintiff.

And

G. Giri Babu, Hindu, Age:32 years, S/o G. Selvam, residing at D.No.4-66, Brahmin Street, Nagalapuram Village and Mandal, Tirupati District. … Defendant.

This suit is came before me on 20.03.2025 for final hearing in the presence of Sri D.Muni Sekhar, Advocate for Plaintiff and the defendant is remained ex-parte, and having been stood over till this day for consideration, 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 with a prayer to pass a decree and Judgment in favour of the plaintiff against the defendant;

(a) by granting permanent injunction restraining the defendant, his men, agents or anybody on his behalf from in any way interfering with the plaintiff’s peaceful possession and enjoyment of the plaint schedule property and in attending for painting and minor repairs of the same; (b) grant costs of the suit; and (c) grant such other and further reliefs meet and just in the circumstances of the case.

O.S.No.257/20242Dt.03-04-2025.

2)The brief averments of the plaint are that plaintiff is the eldest daughter of her parents late G.Yellamma and late G.Selvam. She has two other younger sisters by name K.Roopa and Pushpa and the defendant is their youngest brother. Their father G.Selvam died while all of them were too young. After the death of their father G.Selvam their mother G.Yellama used to do wood business initially and thereafter bakery business for their lively hood until her death on 30.09.2024. Their mother G. Yellamma out of her hard earnings purchased the plaint schedule property which was vacant site in two continuous plots under a registered sale dated 10.06.2004 vide document

No.308/2004 of SRO, Pitchatur from one Munaswamy and under another registered sale deed, dated 10.08.2006 vide document No.533/2006 of SRO,

Pitchatur. Thereafter three years she got constructed a terraced residential house in the aforesaid property which constitutes the suit schedule property for their residence. Since then, the plaintiff, their mother, two sisters and brother used to live in the suit schedule house consisting of five rooms.

3)It is submitted that the plaintiff mother also purchased two other vacant house sites properties abutting one another under two Reg. sale deeds in her name in the year 2010 and got constructed a semi-finished residential house by the time of her death. The defendant after marriage got addicted to bad vices and began to harass their mother for money to meet his vices. The defendant forcibly took over the management of their family bakery business got it closed within a matter of one year only to clear the debts raised by him to meet his vices. As there arose disputes because of his vices he put up separate family in some other house in the village along with his wife and three children leaving their mother in the schedule house to her fate in her old age while suffering with severe ill health due to liver Cirrhosis.

4)It is further submitted that her two sisters could not look after her mother because of their family problems and the defendant, who is her brother also

O.S.No.257/20243Dt.03-04-2025.

did not look after her mother in her last days due to his vices and on the ill advice of his wife. Therefore, the plaintiff alone looked after their mother for her medical necessities and cleared the loans raised by the defendant on the bakery business. Their mother G.Yellamma could not discharge her mortgage debts over the schedule property. Therefore, the plaintiff discharged the mortgage loan of her mother and took custody of the title deeds of the schedule property which are in the name of her mother. The plaintiff submits that as her mother lost the original title deed dated 10.08.2006 her mother obtained certified copy and entrusted the same to the plaintiff. The plaintiff also submits that her mother could not return the plaintiff’s money taken for purchase of gold to her. So also, her mother took her gold ornaments weighing 64 grams to raise loan for her medical and family necessities and did not return those gold ornaments. There by the plaintiff became indebted to several persons on account of her mother’s ill-health and defendant’s vices and mismanagement of their family and bakery business by the defendant.

5)It is further submitted that as their mother was due to her on several counts referred above, she executed a will, dated 25.09.2024 in respect of the suit schedule residential horse in her favour where she was living in her last days and died on 30.09.2024 reciting in the aforesaid will as to the circumstances under which she executed the last will in favour of the plaintiff.

After the death of their mother the will dated 25.09.2024 executed by her in favor of the plaintiff became operative and she became absolute owner of the suit schedule property. The plaintiff submit that she performed the last rights of her mother with the help of their two sisters. On the other hand, the defendant simply collected donations from their relations in the name of last rights of their mother to clear the electricity bills of the house and thereafter sold all the house hold furniture and other articles in the suit schedule property to meet his vices and took away all the house tax receipts, electricity receipts connected with the suit property with the suit property with him. But, the

O.S.No.257/20244Dt.03-04-2025.

schedule residential house property is in her possession and enjoyment after the death of their mother on 30.09.2024.

6)It is further submitted that when herself with her sisters was about to star painting and attend for minor repairs for the schedule house property to perform the third month ceremony of their mother the defendant began to give threats at her stating that he will dispossess her from the schedule property and she cannot attend for painting and other minor repair works. In fact, on 05.12.2024 at about 9.00 a.m when the plaintiff along with her two sisters were about to start painting and minor repairs of the schedule property with the help of workers the defendant came over there in a fully drunken stage along with his men who are all anti-social elements and threatened them with dire consequences not to proceed with the help of neighbors. The defendant left the place stating that he will see her end if she resides in the schedule house and proceeds with the work. Therefore, the plaintiff apprehends danger to her life in the hands of the defendant. Therefore, the plaintiff is constrained to file this suit.

7)It is further submitted that the suit schedule house property is situate in

Nagalapuram Village within the territorial jurisdiction of this Hon’ble court. The plaintiff though permanent resident of Nagalapuram Village, on account of her husband’s profession she is temporarily living in Bangalore. Therefore, this

Hon’ble court got territorial jurisdiction to entertain the suit since the suit is

filed in time.

8)Though the suit summons received by the defendant from the Hon’ble

Court and through the Registered Post ‘served’ personally, but the defendant is called absent. Service held sufficiently. No representation. Hence the defendant is set ex-parte.

9)To prove the case of plaintiff examined herself as PW1 and got exhibited Ex.A1 to Ex.A5 documents. Ex.A1 is the Registered sale deed

O.S.No.257/20245Dt.03-04-2025.

bearing Doc. No.308/2004, dated 10.06.2004 in favour of plaintiff’s mother,

Ex.A2 is the C.C. of Registered Sale deed bearing Doc.No.533/2006, dated 10.08.2006 in favour of plaintiff’s mother, Ex.A3 is the Will executed by

G.Yellamma, dated 25.09.2024 in favour of plaintiff. Ex.A4 is the Death certificate of plaintiff’s mother, dated 30.09.2024. Ex.A5 is the Valuation

Certificate issued by SRO of Pichatur, dated 02.11.2024 for the schedule property. PW1 also got examined one K.Rupa, who is younger sister of PW1 and G.Gowri, who is one of the attesters of Ex.A3/will as PW2 and PW3.

10)Heard the counsel for plaintiffs. Perused the material on record.

11)Now, the points for determination are:

1) Whether the plaintiff is entitled for permanent injunction, restraining the defendant, his men, agents or anybody on his behalf of from in any way interfering with the plaintiffs’ peaceful possession and enjoyment over the plaint schedule property and in attending for painting and minor repairs of the same in any manner as prayed for?

2) To what relief?

12)POINT NO:1- In order to grant the relief of permanent injunction, the plaintiff has to establish her possession and enjoyment over the plaint schedule property as on the date of filing of the suit, invasion or threat of invasion over her right to an enjoyment over the suit schedule property by the defendant.

13)To prove the possession and enjoyment of the plaintiff, the plaintiff herself examined as P.W.1. The PW1 filed her chief-examination affidavit by reiterating the contents of the plaint and got exhibited Ex.A1 to Ex.A5 documents. Ex.A1 is the Registered sale deed bearing Doc. No.308/2004,

dated 10.06.2004 in favour of plaintiff’s mother, Ex.A2 is the C.C. of

Registered Sale deed bearing Doc.No.533/2006, dated 10.08.2006 in favour of plaintiff’s mother, Ex.A3 is the Will executed by G.Yellamma, dated

O.S.No.257/20246Dt.03-04-2025.

25.09.2024 in favour of plaintiff. Ex.A4 is the Death certificate of plaintiff’s mother, dated 30.09.2024. Ex.A5 is the Valuation Certificate issued by SRO of

Pichatur, dated 02.11.2024 for the schedule property.

14)PW2 filed her chief examination affidavit and stated the facts as similar to the facts stated by PW1. PW2 further deposed that the plaintiff is her elder sister and as such she knows the plaint schedule property and facts of the suit. PW2 further deposed that their mother out of her earnings purchased the plaint schedule property and same was registered on the name of PW1 i.e., house consisting of site and rooms.

15)PW3 filed her chief examination affidavit and stated the facts as similar to the facts stated by PW1. PW3 further deposed that the plaintiff is her sister’s daughter and as such she knows the plaint schedule property and facts of the suit. PW3 further deposed that the defendant is her sister’s son.

Her sister by name G.Yellamma out of her earnings purchased the plaint schedule property and same was given to plaintiff by way of Will on 25.09.2024 which is the last testament executed by her sister G.Yellamma in which she is one of the attesters of the Will (Ex.A3) on the name of plaintiff i.e., house consisting of site and rooms.

16)Though the suit summons received by the defendant from the Hon’ble

Court and through the Registered Post was ‘served’ personally, but the defendant is called absent. No representation. Hence the defendant is set ex-parte. It appears that the defendant has no objection to pass a decree and

Judgment against him for the suit claim. Hence, the evidence of P.W.1 is conclusive proof and Ex.A1 to Ex.A5 documents are remained unchallenged and the claim of plaintiff is proved.

17)This Court relied upon a decision of Hon’ble High Court for the State of

Telangana at Hyderabad in between Vuppalapati Ramesh v. T.Narayan

Reddy reported in 2023 (1) ALT 16 (DB) (TS) wherein the Hon’ble High Court

O.S.No.257/20247Dt.03-04-2025.

held that “Approaching the Court with clean hands – The three main principles which govern the grant or refusal of injunction are (a) prima facie case;

(b) balance of convenience; and, (c) irreparable injury – In grant and refusal of injunction, pleadings and documents play vital role – Only on weighing competing possibilities or probabilities of likelihood of injury, as injunction would be granted – Temporary injunction, being an equitable relief, the discretion to grant such relief will be exercised only when the plaintiff’s conduct is free from blame and he approaches the Court with clean hands –

The conduct of the plaintiffs is not free from suspicion and they did not approach the Court below with clean hands – There is suppression of material facts also – The plaintiffs failed to establish a prima facie case and also the other requirements for granting temporary injunction order in their favour –

When the first factor, namely, prima facie case, which is sine qua non, is not satisfied, it follows that the appellant/plaintiff No.3 is not entitled to the equitable relief of temporary injunction – The Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is lacking merits and is liable to be dismissed.

Quotable points: (1) Principles for granting injunction – The three main principles which govern the grant or refusal of injunction are (a) prima facie case; (b) balance of convenience; and, (c) irreparable injury – In grant and refusal of injunction, pleadings and documents play vital role.

(2) Possibilities for granting injunction – Only on weighing competing possibilities or probabilities of likelihood of injury, an injunction would be granted.

(3) Clean hands – Temporary injunction, being an equitable relief, the discretion to grant such relief will be exercised only when the plaintiff’s conduct is free from blame and he approaches the Court with clean hands.

18)From the above said reasons, this Court holds that the defendant is hereby restrained by way of granting permanent injunction not to interfere with the possession and enjoyment of the plaintiff over the plaint schedule property.

Accordingly, Point No.1 is determined against the defendant and in favour of plaintiff.

O.S.No.257/20248Dt.03-04-2025.

19)POINT No.2: In view of findings in Point No.1, this suit is to be decreed with costs.

In the result, this suit is decreed with costs in favour of the plaintiff against the defendant by granting permanent injunction restraining the defendant, his men, agents or anybody on his behalf of from in any way interfering with the plaintiffs’ peaceful possession and enjoyment over the plaint schedule property and in attending for painting and minor repairs of the same in any manner whatsoever.

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

pronounced by me in the open court on this 03 rd day of April, 2025.

Sd/- V.Gopala Krishna,

Additional Civil Judge (Jr. Div.), Puttur.

FAC/ Civil Judge (Jr. Div.), Sathyavedu.

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

WITNESSES EXAMINED

For Plaintiffs:For Defendant

P.W.1: K. Priya.Set ex-parte. P.W.2: K. Rupa. P.W.3: G.Gowri

DOCUMENTS MARKED

For Plaintiff:

Ex.A1Registered sale deed bearing Doc. No.308/2004, dated 10.06.2004 in : favour of plaintiff’s mother. Ex.A2C.C. of Registered Sale deed bearing Doc.No.533/2006, dated : 10.08.2006 in favour of plaintiff’s mother. Ex.A3Will executed by G.Yellamma, dated 25.09.2024 in favour of plaintiff. : Ex.A4Death certificate of plaintiff’s mother, dated 30.09.2024. :

O.S.No.257/20249Dt.03-04-2025.

Ex.A5Valuation Certificate issued by SRO of Pichatur, dated 02.11.2024 for the : schedule property.

For Defendant:

Nil.

Sd/- V.Gopala Krishna,

Additional Civil Judge (Jr. Div.), Puttur.

FAC/ Civil Judge (Jr. Div.), Sathyavedu.

//True Copy//

AJCJ, PTR,

FAC, JCJ, STVD.

O.S.No.257/202410Dt.03-04-2025.

IN THE COURT OF THE CIVIL JUDGE (JUNIOR DIVISION) AT SATHAVEDU.

Present: Sri V. Gopala Krishna,

Additional Civil Judge (Junior Division),

Puttur. FAC/ Civil Judge (Junior Division), Sathyavedu.

Thursday, the Third (03rd) day of April, 2025.

O. S. N O .257 / 2024.

Between:

K. Priya, Hindu, Age:35 years, W/o K. Munaiah, D.No.4-100, Bramhana Street, Nagalapuram Village and Mandal, Tirupathi District and Temporarily residing at D.No.412, near Fathima masjid, Ambedkar Nagar, Viginapura, Banglore North, Durvani Nagar, Bangalore, Karnataka State.

… Plaintiff.

And

G. Giri Babu, Hindu, Age:32 years, S/o G. Selvam, residing at D.No.4-66, Brahmin Street, Nagalapuram Village and Mandal, Tirupati District. … Defendant.

This is a suit filed by the plaintiff against the defendant with a prayer to pass a decree and Judgment in favour of the plaintiff against the defendant;

(a) by granting permanent injunction restraining the defendant, his men, agents or anybody on his behalf from in any way interfering with the plaintiff’s peaceful possession and enjoyment of the plaint schedule property and in attending for painting and minor repairs of the same; (b) grant costs of the suit; and (c) grant such other and further reliefs meet and just in the circumstances of the case.

PARTICULARS OF VALUATION

Market value of the plaint schedule property as per the certificate, date 02.11.2024 furnished by the SRO, PichaturRs.28,44,600-00 is (Value of the site 179 sq. yards x 2400 = 24,000/- and value for RCC building 1610 sq. fts x 1500 =24,15,000/-) National value for the relief of permanent injunction in respect of plaint schedule property @ 10% of the market Rs.2,84,460-00 value is Court fee paid thereon under Sec.26 (c) of APCF & SV ActRs.5,326-00

O.S.No.257/202411Dt.03-04-2025.

Plaint Presented on: 12.12.2024. Last Represented on : 16.12.2024. Plaint Filed on : 16.12.2024.

The cause of action for the suit arose on 10.06.2004 and 10.08.2006 when the plaintiff’s mother G.Yellamma purchased the suit schedule property with her hard earnings and got constructed the suit schedule residential house property on several dates when the plaintiff attended on her mother’s ill health gave loans to discharge the debts incurred by the defendant and also to purchase gold item etc., and on 25.09.2024 when her mother executed the Will for the schedule property in her favour, on 30.09.2024 when her mother died in the schedule house and thereby she became absolute owner of the schedule residential house and finally on 05.12.2024 at 9.00 AM when the defendant along with his men came to the schedule property and threatened the plaintiff and her two sisters when they were attending to white washing and repairs of the schedule property and continues de-die-in-diem at Nagalapuram Village town where the schedule property is situated within the jurisdiction of this Hon’ble Court.

This suit is came before me on 20.03.2025 for final hearing in the presence of Sri D.Muni Sekhar, Advocate for Plaintiff and the defendant is remained ex-parte, and having been stood over till this day for consideration, this court doth order and decree as follows:

i)that the suit be and the same is hereby decreed with costs in favour of the plaintiff against the defendant by granting permanent injunction restraining the defendant, his men, agents or anybody on his behalf of from in any way interfering with the plaintiffs’ peaceful possession and enjoyment over the plaint schedule property and in attending for painting and minor repairs of the same in any manner whatsoever.

ii)That the defendant do also pay a sum of Rs.7,028/- (Rupees Seven Thousand and Twenty Eight Only) towards costs of the suit.

Given under my hand and the seal of the Court this 03 rd day of April, 2025.

Sd/- V.Gopala Krishna,

Addl.Civil Judge (Jr. Div.), Puttur. FAC Civil Judge (Jr. Div.), Sathyavedu.

O.S.No.257/202412Dt.03-04-2025.

STATEMENT OF COSTS

Sl.NoDescriptionFor PlaintiffFor Defendant .(Rs.)(Rs.) 1Vakalath 2-00 2Stamp on plaint5,326-00 3Pleaders fee1,500-00Set ex-parte. 4Process- 5Writing Charges 100-00 6Typing Charges 100-00 Total7,028-00

Sd/- V.Gopala Krishna,

Addl. Civil Judge (Jr. Div.), Puttur. FAC Civil Judge (Jr. Div.), Sathyavedu.

S C H E D U L E

Tirupathi District, Nagalapuram Mandal and revenue village, village site in Survey No.969/A/33/1, Bramhana Veedhi, Western side in the following.

Item No.1

Old Door NO.4-69 with measurements

East to West – 70 feet. North to South – 15 feet.

Item No.2

Tirupathi District, Nagalapuram Mandal and revenue village, village site in Survey No.969/A/33/1, Bramhana Veedhi, Western side with Old Door No.4-71 with measurements.

East to West – 70 feet. North to South – 08 feet.

Total site admeasuring 23x70 vacant site with residential RCC building bearing new door No.4-100 with all accessories i,e., doors, windows, electricity connections etc., within the following boundaries:-

O.S.No.257/202413Dt.03-04-2025.

East: Bramhana Street. West:Harikanteswaraswamy Gudimanyam. North:House of Radha Krishna. South:House of Radha Krishna.

Sd/- V.Gopala Krishna,

Addl. Civil Judge (Jr. Div.), Puttur. FAC Civil Judge (Jr. Div.), Sathyavedu.

//True Copy//

AJCJ, PTR,

FAC, JCJ, STVD.

FromTo

V. Gopala Krishna,The Hon’ble Principal District Judge,

Judicial Magistrate of First Class,CHITTOOR.

PUTTUR. FAC Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Sathyavedu.

Dis. No. /2025, dt. - -2025.

Honoured Sir,

Sub:COURTS - Criminal Courts – Judicial Magistrate of First Class Court, Sathyavedu – Submission of entire case record with committal order in P.R.C. No.07/2024 on the file of this Court – Regarding.

* * *

I am herewith submitting the Committal Order with entire case record in

P.R.C. No.07 of 2024 (Cr. No.38 of 2022 of Nagalapuram Police Station) on the file of this Court after commitment of the case to the Hon’ble Court of Sessions,

Chittoor Division, Chittoor.

Yours faithfully,

Judicial Magistrate of First Class,

Puttur. FAC Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Sathyavedu.

Encl: Entire case record in P.R.C. No.07 of 2024 duly indexed.

F O R M – 31

IN THE COURT OF THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS, SATHYAVEDU.

P.R.C. No: 07 of 2024 (Cr. No.38 of 2022 of Nagalapuram Police Station)

State Represented by The Sub-Inspector of Police,

Nagalapuram Police Station. ...Complainant.

// Versus // A-1)N. Dillibabu Reddy, Age:57 years, S/o Late Poli Reddy,

A-2)N. Lokanadham Reddy, Age: 62 years, S/o Late Poli Reddy,

A-3)N. Madhan Gopal Reddy, Age:27 years, S/o N.Lokanadham Reddy,

A-4)N. Pavan Kumar Reddy, Age:31 years, S/o N. Subramanyam Reddy,

All are residents of Vajjavarikandriga Village in Nagalapuram Mandal.

(Note: This case is split up from PRC.No.07/2022 as the stay is pending against A4) … Accused.

NOTICE OF THE COMMITMENT BY MAGISTRATE TO PUBLIC PROSECUTOR.

The Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Sathyavedu hereby gives notice that he has committed PRC No.07 of 2024 (Cr.No.38 of 2022 of Nagalapuram Police

Station) for trial at the next Sessions, and the Magistrate hereby instructs the

Public Prosecutor to conduct the prosecution of the case.

The charge sheet against the accused No.4 is u/s 341, 307 r/w 34 of IPC.

Dated this the 17 th day of April, 2025.

Judicial Magistrate of First Class,

Puttur. FAC Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Sathyavedu.

IN THE COURT OF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS : SATHYAVEDU.

PRESENT: Sri V. Gopala Krishna

Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Puttur.

FAC Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Sathyavedu.

Thursday, the Seventeenth (17th) day of April, 2025.

P.R.C No: 07 of 2024

(Cr.No.38 of 2022 of Nagalapuram Police Station)

Between:

State Represented by The Sub-Inspector of Police, Nagalapuram Police Station.

... Complainant.

And:

A-1)N. Dillibabu Reddy, Age:57 years, S/o Late Poli Reddy,

A-2)N. Lokanadham Reddy, Age: 62 years, S/o Late Poli Reddy,

A-3)N. Madhan Gopal Reddy, Age:27 years, S/o N. Lokanadham Reddy, A-4) N.Pavan Kumar Reddy, Age:31 years, S/o N. Subramanyam Reddy,

All are residents of Vajjavarikandriga Village in Nagalapuram Mandal.

(Note: This case is split up from PRC.No.07/2022 as the stay is pending against A4) … Accused.

This case is came before me on 17.04.2025 for committal in the presence of Assistant Public Prosecutor for the State/Complainant and Sri D.Venkateswarlu and Sri M.Krishna Rao, Counsels for A4 and upon perusing the entire material on record, this Court made the following:

O R D E R

1.The Sub-Inspector of Police, Nagalapuram Police Station, had filed charge sheet against A1 to A4 in Crime No.38 of 2022 of Nagalapuram Police

Station for the offence under Secs.341 and 307 r/w 34 IPC.

2.The Brief averments of charge sheet are that this is a case of wrongful restrain, attempt to murder that occurred on 13.04.2022 at about 5.30 PM, at

Endotamma Temple, Vajjavarikandriga Village in Nagalapuram Mandal and reported in the Police Station on 16.04.2022 at 2.00 PM by the

Complainant/LW1/E.Hari Prasad, Age:25 years, S/o E.Subramanyam Reddy,

Vajjavarikandriga Village in Nagalapuram Mandal, wherein the accused A1 to A4 were wrongfully restrained the complainant while he was going in his car to

Janikapuram Village, Nagalapuram, A2 dragged him out from the car by caught hold his shirt, abused him as “Neeku enta dhairyam unte yelam pata paduthav” and all the accused A1 to A4 were assaulted the complainant with iron rods and hard sticks, caused bleeding injuries on his head and body with a common intention to kill him due to the complainant has taken the fish tank auction. Then the complainant shifted to Govt. Hospital, Nagalalpuram, after taking first aid and then he shifted to CHC, Sathyavedu and then to SVRRGG Hospital, Tirupati for expert treatment.

3)During the course of investigation, on receipt of report,

LW9/M.Prathap, S.I. of Police in Nagalapuram PS registered the same as a case in

Cr.No.38/2022 u/s 341, 307 r/w 34 IPC in Nagalapuram PS on 16.04.2022 at 2.00 PM, submitted FIRs to all concerned officers and took up investigation into the case.

4)During the course of further investigation, on 16.04.2022

LW9/M.Prathap, S.I. of Police in Nagalapuram PS secured the presence of the complainant at Nagalapuram PS, examined him and recorded his statement

U/sec.161(3) Cr.P.C in his CD Part-II and a copy of the same is herewith enclosed for kind perusal. On the same day, LW9/M.Prathap, S.I. of Police in Nagalapuram

PS, visited the scene of offence place, examined the same and a rough sketch has been prepared. At the spot, he secured the presence of the witnessess

LW2/E.Subramanyam Reddy, LW3/E.Sreedevi, LW4/P.Hari Babu @ Chinna and

LW5/M.Yugandhar, examined them and recorded their statement U/sec.161(3)

Cr.P.C in his CD Part-II. At the scene of offence, LW9/M.Prathap, S.I. of Police in

Nagalapuram PS searched for the crime weapon i.e., two sticks are seized under cover of mahazarnama.

5)During the course of further investigation, on 19.05.2022

LW9/M.Prathap, S.I. of Police in Nagalapuram PS took up further investigation in to this, received the anticipatory bail order copy of the accused A1 to A4 vide Crl.M.P.

No.261 of 2022, dated 16.05.2022 of the Hon’ble IV Additional District and

Sessions Judge, Tirupathi. Basing on the evidence of the witnesses and

investigation, there is a prima-facie material is made out against the accused A1 to

A4 u/secs.341, 307 r/w 34 IPC. Hence the charge.

6)On appearance of A1 to A4, copies of case documents were furnished to them as per Section 207 of Cr.P.C. Since the stay is pending against A4 in IA

No.1/2022 in CRLP No.7850/2022, dated 29.09.2022 of Hon’ble High Court of AP at Amaravathi, this case against A4 is split up as per Rule 19, 20 of Criminal Rules of Practice and issue separate PRC No.07/2024 against A4. Now the present case is against A4 only.

7)On receipt of charge sheet, this case has been taken on cognizance for the offence u/secs.341, 307 r/w 34 IPC against A4.

8)The offence U/Secs.341, 307 r/w 34 IPC against A4, in which Sec.307

IPC, is exclusively triable by the Hon’ble Court of Sessions, the case is committed to the Hon’ble Court of Sessions, Chittoor Division under Sec.209(a) of Cr.P.C.

9)When questioned the accused No.4 about his means to engage an advocate during the trial at the Hon’ble Court of Sessions, A4 stated that he has means to engage an Advocate.

10)In the result, the case is committed to the Hon’ble Court of Sessions,

Chittoor Division under Sec.209(a) Cr.P.C., for taking trial for the offence u/secs.341, 307 r/w 34 IPC, is exclusively triable by the Hon’ble Court of Sessions,

Chittoor Division.

11)The accused No.4 who is on bail allowed to continue on the same bail during and until the trial before the Hon'ble Court of Sessions under Sec.209(b) of

Cr.P.C.

12)The office is directed to submit the entire case record, articles, properties, if any, to the Hon’ble Court of Sessions, Chittoor Division, duly indexed, immediately U/Sec.209(c) Cr.P.C.

13)The Public Prosecutor, Chittoor is notified about the commitment of the case to the Hon’ble Court of Sessions, Chittoor Division U/Sec.209(d) Cr.P.C.

14)The Accused No.4 is directed to appear before the Hon’ble Court of

Sessions, Chittoor Division on receipt of summons.

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

pronounced by me in open Court, the 17 th day of April, 2025.

Sd/- V. Gopala Krishna,

Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Puttur.

FAC Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Sathyavedu.

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

NIL.

Sd/- V. Gopala Krishna,

Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Puttur.

FAC Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Sathyavedu.

// True Copy //

Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Puttur.

FAC Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Sathyavedu.

IN THE COURT OF THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS,

SATYHAVEDU.

P.R C. No. 07 of 2024.

Extract of Reg. No. 27

1. Number of the case : P.R.C. No. 07 of 2024

2. Name of the accused :A-1) N. Dillibabu Reddy, Age:57 years, S/o Late Poli Reddy,

A-2)N. Lokanadham Reddy, Age: 62 years, S/o Late Poli Reddy,

A-3)N. Madhan Gopal Reddy, Age:27 years, S/o N. Lokanadham Reddy,

A-4)N. Pavan Kumar Reddy, Age:31 years, S/o N. Subramanyam Reddy,

All are residents of Vajjavarikandriga Village in Nagalapuram Mandal.

(Note: This case is split up from PRC.No.07/2022 as the stay is pending against A4)

3. Substance of complaint: This is a case of wrongful restrain, attempt to murder that occurred on 13.04.2022 at about 5.30 PM, at Endotamma Temple, Vajjavarikandriga Village in Nagalapuram Mandal and reported in the Police Station on 16.04.2022 at 2.00 PM by the Complainant/LW1/E.Hari Prasad, Age:25 years, S/o E.Subramanyam Reddy, Vajjavarikandriga Village in Nagalapuram Mandal, wherein the accused A1 to A4 were wrongfully restrained the complainant while he was going in his car to Janikapuram Village, Nagalapuram, A2 dragged him out from the car by caught hold his shirt, abused him as “Neeku enta dhairyam unte yelam pata paduthav” and all the accused A1 to A4 were assaulted the complainant with iron rods and hard sticks, caused bleeding injuries on his head and body with a common intention to kill him due to the complainant has taken the fish tank auction.

4. Complainant :State Represented by The Sub-Inspector of Police, Nagalapuram Police Station. (Crime No.38/2022)

5.Name of witnesses for 01E. Hari Prasad. Prosecution. 02E. Subramanyam Reddy. 03E. Sridevi. 04P. Hari Babu @ Chinna. 05M. Yugandhar. 06S. Venkatesh. 07P. Sateesh. 08Dr.C.H.Ramesh, CAS. 09M. Prathap, S.I. of Police.

6. Name of witnesses for defence : Nil.

7. Summary of facts proved or confessed: Vide committal order

8. Result of enquiry :The case is committed to the Hon’ble Court of Sessions, Sessions Division, Chittoor as per Sec.209 Cr.P.C.

9. Date of offence :13.04.2022.

10. Date of complaint :16.04.2022.

11. Date of apprehension :16.05.2022. (A4)

12. Date of closing of enquiry :17.04.2025.

13. Explanation of delay :Vide diary extract.

Sd/- V. Gopala Krishna,

Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Puttur.

FAC Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Sathyavedu.

// True Copy //

Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Puttur.

FAC Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Sathyavedu.

IN THE COURT OF THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS

::SATHYAVEDU.

P.R.C No: 07 of 2024

(Cr. No.38 / 2022 of Nagalapuram Police Station)

DIARY EXTRACT

01-08-2024:Cognizance is taken under Secs.341, 307 r/w 34 IPC against A4 only (Split up case). Issue summons to the accused No.4, call on 19.09.2024.

19-09-2024:Accused is called present. Stay is pending. Call on 28.11.2024. 28-11-2024:A4 is called present. Stay is pending. call on 30.01.2025.

30.01.2025:A4 is called present. Stay is pending. call on 27.02.2025.

27.02.2025:A4 is called present. Stay is pending. call on 08.04.2025.

08.04.2025:A4 is called present. Stay is pending. PO is on Transfer. Case is reposted to 17.04.2025. 17.04.2025:Accused No.4 is called present. The Counsel for accused filed a Memo stating that stay is vacated against A4 on 28.11.2024 vide in CRLP.No.7850/2022 on the file of

Hon’ble High Court of A.P. Hence A4 is called present.

Order Pronounced (VSO) in open Court.

In the result, the case is committed to the Hon’ble Court of Sessions, Chittoor Division under Secs.341, 307 IPC r/w 34 IPC for taking trial. The office is directed to submit the entire case record, articles, properties, if any, to the Hon’ble Court of Sessions, Chittoor Division. The A4 is directed to appear before the Hon’ble Court of Sessions on receipt of summons.

Sd/- V.Gopala Krishna,

Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Puttur.

//True Copy//FAC Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Sathyavedu.

Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Puttur.

FAC Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Sathyavedu.

FromTo

V. Gopala Krishna,The Hon’ble Principal District Judge,

Judicial Magistrate of First Class,CHITTOOR.

PUTTUR. FAC Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Sathyavedu.

Dis.No. /2025, dt. - -2025.

Honoured Sir,

Sub:COURTS - Criminal Courts – Judicial Magistrate of First Class Court, Sathyavedu – Submission of entire case record with committal order in P.R.C. No.01/2025 on the file of this Court – Regarding.

* * *

I am herewith submitting the Committal Order with entire case record in

P.R.C.No.01 of 2025 (Cr.No.50 of 2024 of Sathyavedu PS) on the file of this Court after commitment of the case to the Hon'ble Court of Sessions, Chittoor Division,

Chittoor.

Yours faithfully,

Judicial Magistrate of First Class,

Puttur. FAC Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Satyavedu.

Encl: Entire case record in P.R.C. No.01 of 2025 duly indexed.

F O R M – 31

IN THE COURT OF THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS, SATHYAVEDU.

P.R.C. No: 01 of 2025 (Cr. No.50/2024 of Sathyavedu Police Station)

State Represented by the Sub-Inspector of Police,

Sathyavedu Police Station....Complainant.

// Versus //

Shaik Shameem Basha, Age:25 years, S/o Late Chand Basha, R/o A.M.Puram Village, Sathyavedu Mandal,Tirupathi District. … Accused.

NOTICE OF THE COMMITMENT BY MAGISTRATE TO PUBLIC PROSECUTOR.

The Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Sathyavedu hereby gives notice that he has committed PRC No.01 of 2025 (Cr.No.50 of 2024 of Sathyavedu Police

Station) for trial at the next Sessions, and the Magistrate hereby instructs the

Public Prosecutor to conduct the prosecution of the case.

The charge sheet against the accused is U/Secs.306 and 309 IPC.

Dated this the 17 th day of April, 2025.

Judicial Magistrate of First Class,

Puttur. FAC Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Sathyavedu.

IN THE COURT OF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS : SATHYAVEDU.

PRESENT: Sri V. Gopala Krishna,

Judicial Magistrate of First Class,

Puttur. FAC Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Sathyavedu.

Thursday, the Seventeenth (17th) day of April, 2025.

P.R.C No: 01 of 2025. (Cr.No.50 of 2024 of Sathyavedu Police Station)

Between:

State Represented by the Sub-Inspector of Police, Sathyavedu Police Station.

... Complainant.

And:

Shaik Shameem Basha, Age:25 years, S/o Late Chand Basha, R/o A.M.Puram Village, Sathyavedu Mandal, Tirupathi District. … Accused.

This case is came before me on 17.04.2025 for committal in the presence of Assistant Public Prosecutor for the State/Complainant and Sri P.D.Venkateswarlu, Counsel for the accused and upon perusing the entire material on record, this Court made the following:

O R D E R

1)The Sub-Inspector of Police, Sathyavedu PS, had filed charge sheet against the accused in Crime No.50 of 2024 of Sathyavedu Police Station for the offence U/Secs.306 and 309 IPC.

2)The Brief averments of charge sheet are that this is a case of abetment to commit suicide that occurred on 20.04.2024 at about 02.30 PM, at

Raghappa Forest (Mitta), near A.M. Puram Village, Sathyavedu Mandal, Tirupathi

District and reported in the Police Station on 22.04.2024 at 12.00 PM by the

Complainant Sakamuri Kumari, Age:47 years, W/o Babu, R/o Mitta Indlu,

A.M.Puram Village, Sathyavedu Mandal, Tirupathi District. The Complainant having two daughters among eldest daughter namely Bhuvana, Age:26 years got married to nearest relative Muneeswaraiah, past 9 years ago. They blessed with three children. The Complainant’s daughter Bhuvana having illicit relationship with one

S.Shameem Basha of A.M.Puram Village. The Complainant’s son-in-law found that his wife Bhuvana talking with S.Shameem Basha over the phone on 19.04.2024, then the Complainant’s son-in-law reprimanded his wife and leave her at

Complainant’s house on 20.04.2024 by saying about her illicit relationship and told that admonish their daughter and sent her for peaceful marital life. But on the same day the accused S.Shameem Basha contacted the Complainant’s daughter over phone and both are meet at Raghappa Forest, where the accused abetment the complainant’s daughter by saying if knew everyone about their illicit relationship, they have not leading by staying in village, so they will died by consuming herbicide poison, then the said Shameem Basha (accused) and Bhuvana consumed herbicide poison with intention of committed suicide. Then the said

Bhuvana not bared pains and creams loudly. Then on hearing the screams, the

Complainant and her relatives rushed to the spot and found that the said Bhuvana suffering from pains due to consuming herbicide poison. Then the said Bhuvana was shifted to CHC, Sathyavedu and got first aid, in turn shifted to Rajiv Gandhi

Govt. Hospital, Chennai for expert treatment, but the said Bhuvana could not survive and succumbed on 21.04.2024 at 6.45 PM while undergoing treatment.

The accused also consumed herbicide poison and he was shifted to DBR Hospital,

Tirupati.

3)During the course of investigation, on the receipt of the above report,

LW17/A.Chandrasekhar Naidu, ASI of Police in SHO, Sathyavedu Police Station registered the case as Cr.No.50/2024 U/Secs.306 and 309 IPC of Sathyavedu

Police Station on 22.04.2024 at 12.00 Noon and submitted copies of FIRs to all concerned officers and took up investigation into.

4)During the course of further investigation, on 21.06.2024 at 10.30 AM,

LW18/K.Veeranjaneyulu, Sub-Inspector of Police in SHO, Sathyavedu Police

Station arrested the accused S.Shameem Basha at APSRTC Bus stand,

Sathyavedu town and Mandal in the presence of LW13/P.Nagarjuna, VRO in

Sathyavedu-3 and LW14/P.George, VRA-3, recorded his confession statement and sent him for remand to the Hon’ble Court. Later LW18/K.Veeranjaneyulu, Sub-

Inspector of Police, Sathyavedu Police Station filed charge sheet against the accused.

5)On receipt of Charge sheet, this case has been taken on file for the offence under Secs.306 and 309 IPC against the accused.

6)On appearance of the accused, copies of case documents were furnished to him as per Section 207 Cr.P.C.

7) The offence under Secs.306 and 309 IPC against the accused, is exclusively triable by the Hon'ble Court of Sessions, Chittoor Division, Chittoor, the case is committed to the Hon'ble Court of Sessions, Chittoor Division U/Sec.209(a) of Cr.P.C.

8)When questioned the accused about the means to engage an advocate during the trial at the Hon'ble Court of Sessions, Chittoor Division, the accused stated that he has means to engage an Advocate.

9)In the result, the case is committed to the Hon’ble Court of Sessions,

Chittoor Division under Sec.209(a) Cr.P.C., for taking trial for the offence

U/Secs.306 and 309 IPC, is exclusively triable by the Hon'ble Court of Sessions,

Chittoor Division, Chittoor.

10)The accused who is on bail allowed to continue on the same bail during and until the trial before the Hon'ble Court of Sessions, Chittoor Division under Sec.209(b) Cr.P.C.

11)The Office is directed to submit the entire case record, articles, properties, if any, to the Hon’ble Court of Sessions, Chittoor Division, duly indexed, immediately U/Sec.209(c) Cr.P.C.

12)The Public Prosecutor, Chittoor is notified about the commitment of the case to the Hon'ble Court of Sessions, Chittoor Division U/Sec.209(d) Cr.P.C.

13)The accused is directed to appear before the Hon’ble Court of

Sessions, Chittoor Division on receipt of summons.

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

pronounced by me in open Court, this 17 th day of April, 2025.

Sd/- V. Gopala Krishna,

Judicial Magistrate of First Class,

Puttur. FAC Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Sathyavedu.

// True Copy //

JFCM, PTR.

FAC JFCM, STVD.

IN THE COURT OF THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS,

SATHYAVEDU.

P.R C. No. 01 of 2025.

Extract of Reg. No. 27

1. Number of the case : P.R.C. No. 01 of 2025.

2. Name of the accused : Shaik Shameem Basha, Age:25 years, S/o Late Chand Basha, R/o A.M.Puram Village, Sathyavedu Mandal, Tirupathi District.

3. Substance of Complaint: This is a case of abetment to commit suicide that occurred on 20.04.2024 at about 02.30 PM, at Raghappa Forest (Mitta), near A.M. Puram Village, Sathyavedu Mandal, Tirupathi District and reported in the Police Station on 22.04.2024 at 12.00 PM by the Complainant Sakamuri Kumari, Age:47 years, W/o Babu, R/o Mitta Indlu, A.M.Puram Village, Sathyavedu Mandal, Tirupathi District. The Complainant having two daughters among eldest daughter namely Bhuvana, Age:26 years got married to nearest relative Muneeswaraiah, past 9 years ago. They blessed with three children. The Complainant’s daughter Bhuvana having illicit relationship with one S.Shameem Basha of A.M.Puram Village. The Complainant’s son-in-law found that his wife Bhuvana talking with S.Shameem Basha over the phone on 19.04.2024, then the Complainant’s son-in-law reprimanded his wife and leave her at Complainant’s house on 20.04.2024 by saying about her illicit relationship and told that admonish their daughter and sent her for peaceful marital life. But on the same day the accused S.Shameem Basha contacted the Complainant’s daughter over phone and both are meet at Raghappa Forest, where the accused abetment the complainant’s daughter by saying if knew everyone about their illicit relationship, they have not leading by staying in village, so they will died by consuming herbicide poison, then the said Shameem Basha (accused) and Bhuvana consumed herbicide poison with intention of committed suicide. Then the said Bhuvana not bared pains and creams loudly. Then on hearing the screams, the Complainant and her relatives rushed to the spot and found that the said Bhuvana suffering from pains due to consuming herbicide poison. Then the said Bhuvana was shifted to CHC, Sathyavedu and got first aid, in turn shifted to Rajiv Gandhi Govt. Hospital, Chennai for expert treatment, but the said Bhuvana could not survive and succumbed on 21.04.2024 at 6.45 PM while undergoing treatment. The accused also consumed herbicide poison and he was shifted to DBR Hospital, Tirupati.

4. Complainant :State Represented by the Sub-Inspector of Police, Sathyavedu PS. (Cr. No.50/2024 of Sathyavedu PS)

5.Name of witnesses for 01.S. Kumari. Prosecution. 02.S. Babu.

03.G. Muneeswaraiah.

04.B. Purushothama Reddy.

05.K. Subramanyam Reddy.

06.T. Anandaiah.

07.T. Ravi.

08.P. Vijayan.

09.M. Sireesha.

10.M. Dillibabu.

11.M. Srinivasulu.

12.K. Allaswamy.

13.P. Nagarjuna, VRO.

14.P. George, VRA.

15. Dr. J. Rajasekhar, Asst. Director.

16. Dr. G. Ashwin Kumar, Tutor in Forensic.

17. A. Chandrasekhar Naidu, ASI of Police.

18. K. Veeranjaneyulu, S.I. of Police.

6. Name of witnesses for defence : Nil.

7. Summary of facts proved or confessed : Vide committal order.

8. Result of enquiry :The case is committed to the Hon’ble Court of Sessions, Sessions Division, Chittoor as per Sec.209 Cr.P.C.

9. Date of offence :20.04.2024.

10. Date of complaint :22.04.2024.

11. Date of apprehension :21.06.2024.

12. Date of closing of enquiry :17.04.2025.

13. Explanation of delay :Vide diary extract.

Sd/- V. Gopala Krishna,

Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Puttur,

FAC Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Sathyavedu. // True Copy //

JFCM, PTR.

FAC JFCM, STVD.

IN THE COURT OF THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS ::

SATHYAVEDU.

P.R.C No: 01 of 2025 (Cr. No.50/2024 of Sathyavedu Police Station)

DIARY EXTRACT

24-03-2025:Cognizance is taken for the offence under Secs.306 and 309 IPC against the accused. Issue summons to the accused 17.04.2025.

06-06-2024:Accused is called present. Copies are supplied to accused

U/Sec.230 BNSS. Accused is called present. The case is committed to the Hon’ble Court of Sessions, Chittoor Division

Under Sections 306 and 309 IPC for taking trail. The office is directed to submit the entire case record, articles, properties, if any, to the Hon’ble Court of Sessions, Chittoor Division. The Accused is directed to appear before the Hon’ble Court of Sessions, Chittoor

Division on receipt of summons.

Sd/- V. Gopala Krishna,

Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Puttur,

FAC Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Sathyavedu.

// True Copy //

JFCM, PTR.

FAC JFCM, STVD.

1

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

SATHYAVEDU.

Present: Sri V. Gopala Krishna,

Additional Civil Judge (Junior Division), Puttur.

FAC/Civil Judge (Junior Division), Sathyavedu.

Thursday, the Third (03rd) day of April, 2025.

E.P. No.12/2023

O.S. No.67 / 2020.

Between:

M.Purushotham, S/o Late M.Kodandaramaiah, Aged about 47 years, Hindu, Employee, Residing at Door No.11/185 Palli Street, near water tank, Srikalahasti Town, Thirupathi District.

....Petitioner/Decree Holder.

And:

1.Sanni Mythily, W/o Late Sanni Subramanyam, Age:48 years,

2.Sanni Chamundi, D/o Late Sanni Subramanyam, Age:28 years,

3.Sanni Jyothsna, W/o Late Sanni Subramanyam, Age:23 years,

4.Sanni Vamsi, S/o Late Sanni Subramanyam, Age:21 years,

All are Hindus, Business, residing at Door No.1-7, Jaderi Kandriga Village, Kannavaram Post, Sathyavedu Mandal, Thirupathi District.

….Respondents/Judgment Debtors.

This Execution Petition is came before me on this day i.e., on 03-04-2025 in the presence of Sri M.Krishna Rao, Counsel for the Petitioner/Decree Holder and on perusal of records, this Court delivered the following:- 2

ORDER

1)This Execution Petition is filed by the Petitioner/Decree Holder prays that this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to bring the E.P. schedule property for court auction U/O XXI, Rule 64 C.P.C. after due proclamation U/O

XXI, Rule 66, so as to enable the Decree Holder to realize the E.P. Amount with subsequent interest and cost.

2)Memo is filed on behalf of the DHr., stating that EP is not pressed.

Memo is recorded. Hence this E.P. is dismissed as not pressed.

Pronounced by me in the open Court on this 03 rd day of April, 2025.

Sd/- V.Gopala Krishna,

Addl. Civil Judge (Junior Division), Puttur. FAC/ Civil Judge (Junior Division), Sathyavedu.

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

NIL.

Sd/- V.Gopala Krishna,

Addl. Civil Judge (Junior Division), Puttur. FAC/ Civil Judge (Junior Division), Sathyavedu.

//True Copy//

AJCJ, PTR,

FAC JCJ, STVD.

1

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

SATHYAVEDU.

Present: Sri V. Gopala Krishna,

Additional Civil Judge (Junior Division), Puttur.

FAC/Civil Judge (Junior Division), Sathyavedu.

Thursday, the Third (03rd) day of April, 2025.

E.P. No.22/2022

O.S. No.113 / 2019.

Between:

K.Kasthuri, W/o Late Keswalu, Aged about 50 years, Hindu, Housewife, Residing at Madanambedu Village and Post, Sathyavedu Mandal, Thirupathi District.

....Petitioner/Decree Holder.

And:

P.Dhakshayani, W/o Late Late C.Parandhanam, Aged about 53 years, Hindu, Female, Pensioner, Residing at Madanambedu Village and Post, Sathyavedu Mandal, Thirupathi District. ….Respondent/Judgment Debtor.

This Execution Petition is came before me on this day i.e., on 03-04-2025 in the presence of Sri M.Krishna Rao, Counsel for the Petitioner/Decree Holder and on perusal of records, this Court delivered the following:-

ORDER

1)This Execution Petition is filed by the Petitioner/Decree Holder prays that this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to issue notice U/O XXI, Rule 22

CPC notice and to attach the schedule mentioned movable property of sale

U/O XXI, Rule 43 C.P.C. and bring the same to court auction as per the 2 provisions of U/O XXI, Rule 64 C.P.C. so as to enable the Decree Holder to realize the E.P. Amount with future interest and costs.

2)Memo is filed on behalf of the DHr., stating that EP is not pressed.

Hence this E.P. is dismissed as not pressed. Memo is recorded.

Pronounced by me in the open Court on this 03 rd day of April, 2025.

Sd/- V.Gopala Krishna,

Addl. Civil Judge (Junior Division), Puttur. FAC/ Civil Judge (Junior Division), Sathyavedu.

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

NIL.

Sd/- V.Gopala Krishna,

Addl. Civil Judge (Junior Division), Puttur. FAC/ Civil Judge (Junior Division), Sathyavedu.

//True Copy//

AJCJ, PTR,

FAC, JCJ, STVD.