Velamala Naresh

Senior Civil Judge

V Add District Complex, Allagadda · Kurnool · Andhra Pradesh

Velamala Naresh, Senior Civil Judge, is posted at V Add District Complex, Allagadda, Kurnool, Andhra Pradesh, India. 1,210 court orders on record since 2017. 5 judgments with full text available. Primarily handles OS, L, EP cases.

1,210

Total Orders

Judgments

Orders/Month

Posting

Featured Judgments

OS/164/2018

State Bank of India vs Gajjala Ramanamma

04 Sep 2019

IN THE COURT OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, ALLAGADDA.

Present: Sri Velamala Naresh, Senior Civil Judge, Allagadda.

Wednesday, the 4th day of September, 2019.

Original Suit No.164/2018

State Bank of India, Allagadda,

Represented by its Chief Manager. ... Plaintiff

Versus

G.Ramanamma and 14 others … Defendants

This suit came up for final hearing before me on 9.8.2019 in the presence of Sri P.S.Mahaboob Basha and Sri U.Prathap, Advocates for the

Plaintiff Bank, and the defendants 2 to 15 having remained exparte, suit claim against the 1st defendant was dismissed as not pressed by the plaintiff, upon hearing the counsel for the plaintiff, having perused the material on record and the matter having stoodover for consideration till today, this Court delivered the following:

JUDGMENT

Consequent to filing of suit, with the following averments, by the plaintiff bank against the defendants who formed as selfhelp group by name “Sri Manikanta Podupu Lakshmi Group, Allagadda” seeking recovery of the plaint mentioned amount of Rs.4,13,571/, along with interest and costs of the proceedings which is alleged to be due to it from the defendants in connection with the loan transaction, the present judgment arises.

2.The plaintiff bank is a Banking Corporation incorporated under State Bank of India Act having its Central Office in Mumbai, one of its local offices in Hyderabad and one of its branches in Allagadda and the plaintiff bank is being represented by its Chief Manager, Allagadda.

3.The plaint mentioned 15 defendants formed themselves as selfhelp group styled as “Sri Manikanta Podupu Lakshmi Group of

Allagadda”, the group selected the first defendant G.Ramanamma and second defendant S.Annapoornamma as the first and second leaders respectively of the group, all the group members, by passing a resolution, gave power of attorney to the leaders defendants 1 and 2 for taking loan 2 from the plaintiff bank, acting on the resolution dated 13.8.2008, all the defendants entered into an interse agreement on the same day, in furtherance of resolution and interse agreement, the first and second defendants, being leaders of the said selfhelp group, by submitting loan application and by executing articles of agreement on the same day, sought for loan of Rs.5,00,000/ from the plaintiff bank, after scrutiny of the documents submitted by defendants 1 and 2, the plaintiff bank, while sanctioning the sought loan, issued arrangement letter on the same day by permitting “Sri Manikanta Podupu Lakshmi Group of Allagadda” to take loan to a tune of Rs.5,00,000/ payable in 48 equal monthly installments at the rate of Rs.10,416/, being principal per month, with accrued interest as per Reserve Bank of India guidelines, after completion of the granting process of the loan, the defendants utilized the sanctioned loan of

Rs.5,00,000/ through their account bearing No.30455963914, subsequent to the said borrowing, none of the defendants paid any part of the liability amount of the loan however on the demands made by the personnel of the plaintiff bank, defendants 1 and 2, being leaders of “Sri

Manikanta Podupu Lakshmi Group of Allagadda” executed revival letters,

dated 10.5.2011, 10.11.2013 and 20.9.2015 by acknowledging their

liability of paying the loan due amount, even after execution of revival letters, the defendants did not show any interest in discharging the loan liability amount which forced the plaintiff bank to get issued demand notice dated 2.11.2011 to the defendants and despite the said notice, the defendants did not respond which the plaintiff bank to file the suit.

4.With the said averments, the plaintiff bank requested the

Court to pass a decree in its favour and against the defendants mandating the defendants for payment of the suit claim amount of Rs.4,13,571/ with subsequent interest at the rate of 10.5% p.a., apart from costs of the proceedings, to the plaintiff bank.

5.The defendants 2 to 15 remained exparte. Whereas the suit claim as against 1st defendant was dismissed as not pressed as per the docket order dated 19.12.2018.

6.For substantiating its version, the plaintiff bank got examined

P.W.1 and got marked Exs.A.1 to A.10.

7.Arguments of the learned counsel for the plaintiff bank are heard and perused the record in detail.

8.Hearing of the plaintiff's counsel and perusal of the record leave a point for consideration which is “as to whether or not, the suit claim requires entertaining and upholding”.

POINT:

9.Consequent to becoming exparte of the defendants, both documentary and oral evidence adduced by the plaintiff bank, by remaining on the record undisturbed being unchallenged, establishes the contention of the plaintiff bank that defendants 1 to 15 formed as “Sri

Manikanta Podupu Lakshmi Group” of Allagadda, all the defendants nominated and elected D.1 G.Ramanamma and D.2 S.Annapoornamma as first and second leaders respectively of the said group as seen from inter se agreement Ex.A.3, all the defendants, by passing Ex.A.4 resolution, authorized defendants 1 and 2 for borrowing loan from the plaintiff bank for the upliftment of the said selfhelp group, based on Exs.A.3 and A.4, the defendants 1 and 2, by submitting Ex.A.1 loan application to and by entering into Ex.A.2 articles of agreement with the plaintiff bank, sought for loan of Rs.5,00,000/ from the plaintiff bank, the plaintiff bank, after scrutiny of the submitted documents, sanctioned the sought loan by way of issuing Ex.A.5 Arrangement letter on a stipulation that the borrowed loan amount shall be discharged in 48 equal monthly installments at the rate of Rs.10,416/ per month, being principal, with accrued interest payable as per Reserve Bank of India norms, in furtherance of Ex.A.5, the sanctioned loan was disbursed to the defendants through their account bearing No.30455963914 as seen from Ex.A.10 Account Extract, subsequent to the borrowing of loan from the plaintiff bank, none of the defendants discharged the loan due amount to the plaintiff bank, on the demands made by the personnel of the plaintiff bank, the defendants 1 and 2, being leaders of the selfhelp group, executed Exs.A.6 to A.8 revival letters on 10.5.2011, 10.11.2013 and 20.9.2015 respectively by acknowledging the liability of the loan due amount, even after execution of the said revival letters and despite repeated demands made by the personnel of the plaintiff bank, the defendants did not discharge the loan due amount to the plaintiff bank which got issued Ex.A.9 demand notice dt.2.11.2011 to the defendants, despite the said legal correspondence, the 4 defendants did not respond which forced the plaintiff bank to file the suit seeking recovery of the plaint mentioned amount of Rs.4,13,571/ with subsequent interest and costs, to be true.

10.Therefore, this Court, in view of the afore discussion, felt that it is left with no other way than to uphold the suit claim.

11.In the result, this court, while dismissing the suit against first defendant as not pressed by the plaintiff, hereby decrees the suit with costs in favour of the plaintiff bank and against the defendants 2 to 15 mandating the defendants 2 to 15 for payment of an amount of

Rs.4,13,571/, with interest pendentelite at the rate of 10.5% p.a. and postlite at the rate of 6% p.a. reckonable on the suit amount of

Rs.4,13,571/, to the plaintiff bank.

Typed to my dictation, corrected, signed and pronounced by me in the open Court, this the 4th day of September, 2019.

SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE,

ALLAGADDA.

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

Witnesses Examined

For Plaintiff:For Defendants 2 to 15: P.W.1: P.Srikanth.None

EXHIBITS MARKED

For Plaintiff: Ex.A.1: Application submitted by the first and second defendants to the plaintiff bank, dated 13.8.2008.

Ex.A.2: Articles of agreement executed by the first and second defendants in favour of the plaintiff bank dated 13.8.2008.

Ex.A.3: Interse agreement executed by the defendants in favour of the plaintiff bank dated 13.8.2008.

Ex.A.4: Resolution passed by the defendants dated 13.8.2008.

Ex.A.5: Arrangement letter signed by first and second defendants

dated 13.8.2008.

Ex.A.6: Revival letter executed by first and second defendants in favour of the plaintiff bank dated 10.5.2011.

Ex.A.7: Revival letter executed by first and second defendants in favour of the plaintiff bank dated 10.11.2013.

Ex.A.8: Revival letter executed by first and second defendants in favour of the plaintiff bank dated 20.9.2015.

Ex.A.9: Legal notice issued to the defendants dated 2.11.2011.

Ex.A.10. Account extract, dated 29.8.2018.

For Defendants 2 to 15 : Nil

SCJ, ALG.

IN THE COURT OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, ALLAGADDA.

Present: Sri Velamala Naresh, Senior Civil Judge, Allagadda.

Wednesday, the 4th day of September, 2019.

Original Suit No.164/2018

State Bank of India, Allagadda, a statutory Banking Corporation incorporated under State Bank of India Act, 1955 with its Central Office at Mumbai and one among its local Head Offices at Hyderabad and one of its Branches at Allagadda Village and Mandal, Kurnool District.

Represented by its Chief Manager. ... Plaintiff

Versus

1. Gajjala Ramanamma, W/o G.Jafar Reddy, aged about 44 years, H.No.1672, Vaddegiri Veedhi

2. Sarapu Annapoornamma, W/o Subba Ramaiah, aged about 51 years, H.No.1555, Lingamaiah Street

3. Talinki Madhavi, W/o Krishna Murthy, aged about 41 years, H.No.1556, Lingamaiah Street

4. Kamisetty Padma, W/o K.Gopal Rao, aged about 41 years, H.No.1557, Lingamaiah Street

5. Chittam Lakshmi Devi, W/o Rama Krishna, aged about 50 years, H.No.1558, Lingamaiah Street

6. Amaravathi Kumari, W/o Rachayya, aged about 41 years, H.No.1559, Lingamaiah Street

7. Madisetty Rajeswari, W/o Sudhakar, aged about 45 years, H.No.1540, Lingamaiah Street

8. Mandla Lakshmi Devi, W/o M.Pullaiah, aged about 47 years, H.No.1555/1, Lingamaiah Street

9. Gunda Hari Priya, W/o Ramesh, aged about 41 years, H.No.1555/2, Lingamaiah Street

10. Mangali Lakshmi Devi, W/o Subramanyam, aged about 39 years, H.No.1549, Lingamaiah Street

11. Mangali Rama Lakshmamma, W/o M.Subramanyam, aged about 49 years, H.No.1549/1, Lingamaiah Street 12.Kasturi Lakshmi Devi, W/o Shankarayya, aged about 47 years, H.No.1555/6, Lingamaiah Street 13.Tarangi Parvathi, W/o T.Madhava, aged about 35 years, H.No.1555A, Lingamaiah Street 14.Mangali Sunitha, W/o Bayanna, aged about 35 years, H.No.1673, Lingamaiah Street 15.Gelivi Manjula, W/o Sheshayya, aged about 39 years, H.No.1674, Lingamaiah Street

All are Hindus, Housewives, Residents of Ammavarisala Veedhi, Allagadda Town and Mandal, Kurnool District. … Defendants

Suit filed by the plaintiff bank against the defendants who formed as selfhelp group by name “Sri Manikanta Podupu Lakshmi Group,

Allagadda” seeking recovery of the plaint mentioned amount of 7

Rs.4,13,571/, along with interest and costs of the proceedings which is alleged to be due to it from the defendants in connection with the loan transaction, dated 13.8.2008.

Plaint presented on 5.9.2018 and filed on 28.09.2018.

J.V of Rs.4,13,571/ and C.F of Rs.6,626/ is paid under Sec.20 of A.P.C.F & S.V. Act, 1956.

Cause of action for the suit arose on 13.8.2008 when the defendants obtained loan and executed and submitted application form, interse agreement, resolution sponsorship letter and agreement, on 10.5.2011, 10.11.2013 and 20.9.2015 when the defendants 1 and 2 have executed revival letters acknowledging and confirming the liability of the loan and on 2.11.2011, when the plaintiff got issued legal notice at Allagadda within the jurisdiction of this court.

This suit came up for final hearing before me on 9.8.2019 in the presence of Sri P.S.Mahaboob Basha and Sri U.Prathap, Advocates for the

Plaintiff Bank, and the defendants 2 to 15 having remained exparte, suit claim against the 1st defendant was dismissed as not pressed by the plaintiff, upon hearing the counsel for the plaintiff, this Court doth Order and passed the decree as follows:

1) That the defendants 2 to 15 do pay an amount of Rs.4,13,571/, with interest pendentelite at the rate of 10.5% p.a. and postlite at the rate of 6% p.a. reckonable on the suit amount of Rs.4,13,571/, to the plaintiff bank;

2) That the defendants 2 to 15 do also pay to the plaintiff bank a sum of Rs.15,993/ being the costs of the suit.

3) That the suit against first defendant was dismissed as not pressed by the plaintiff.

Given under my hand and seal of this Court, this the 4th day of September, 2019.

SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE,

ALLAGADDA.

8 9

Memo of Costs

For For D2

Plaintiff Stamp on plaint 662600 Stamp on Vakalath200200 Stamp on process82500 Advocate’s Fee705400Ex parte Publication charges138600 Typing Charges10000

Total 1599300 200

]

SCJ, ALG.

OS/161/2018

State Bank of India vs GRA Siva Lakshmi

04 Sep 2019

IN THE COURT OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, ALLAGADDA.

Present: Sri Velamala Naresh, Senior Civil Judge, Allagadda.

Wednesday, the 4th day of September, 2019.

Original Suit No.161/2018

State Bank of India, Allagadda,

Represented by its Chief Manager. ... Plaintiff

Versus

G.R.A.Siva Lakshmi and 9 others … Defendants

This suit came up for final hearing before me on 9.8.2019 in the presence of Sri P.S.Mahaboob Basha and Sri U.Prathap, Advocates for the

Plaintiff Bank, and the defendants 1 to 10 having remained exparte, upon hearing the counsel for the plaintiff, having perused the material on record and the matter having stoodover for consideration till today, this Court delivered the following:

JUDGMENT

Consequent to filing of suit, with the following averments, by the plaintiff bank against the defendants who formed as selfhelp group by name “Sri Bhavani Podupu Lakshmi Group of Allagadda” seeking recovery of the plaint mentioned amount of Rs.6,68,184/, along with interest and costs of the proceedings which is alleged to be due to it from the defendants in connection with the loan transaction, the present judgment arises.

3.The plaint mentioned 10 defendants formed themselves as selfhelp group styled as “Sri Bhavani Podupu Lakshmi Group of

Allagadda”, the group selected the first defendant G.R.A.Siva Lakshmi and second defendant A.Saraswathi as the first and second leaders respectively of the group, all the group members, by passing a resolution, gave power of attorney to the leaders the defendants 1 and 2 for taking loan from the plaintiff bank, acting on the resolution dated 13.8.2008, all the defendants 2 entered into an interse agreement on the same day, in furtherance of resolution and interse agreement, the first and second defendants, being leaders of the said selfhelp group, by submitting loan application and by executing articles of agreement on the same day, sought for loan of

Rs.5,00,000/ from the plaintiff bank, after scrutiny of the documents submitted by defendants 1 and 2, the plaintiff bank, while sanctioning the sought loan, issued arrangement letter on the same day by permitting “Sri

Bhavani Podupu Lakshmi Group of Allagadda” to take loan to a tune of

Rs.5,00,000/ payable in 48 equal monthly installments at the rate of

Rs.10,417/, being principal per month, with accrued interest as per

Reserve Bank of India guidelines, after completion of the granting process of the loan, the defendants utilized the sanctioned loan of Rs.5,00,000/ through their account bearing No.30455961746, subsequent to the said borrowing, none of the defendants paid any part of the liability amount of the loan however, on the demands made by the personnel of the plaintiff bank, defendants 1 and 2, being leaders of “Sri Bhavani Podupu Lakshmi

Group of Allagadda” executed revival letters, dated 10.5.2011, 10.11.2013 and 20.9.2015 by acknowledging their liability of paying the loan due amount, even after execution of revival letters, the defendants did not show any interest in discharging the loan liability amount which forced the plaintiff bank to get issued demand notice dated 2.11.2011 to the defendants and despite the said notice, the defendants did not respond which the plaintiff bank to file the suit.

4.With the said averments, the plaintiff bank requested the

Court to pass a decree in its favour and against the defendants mandating the defendants for payment of the suit claim amount of Rs.6,68,184/ with subsequent interest at the rate of 10.5% p.a., apart from costs of the proceedings, to the plaintiff bank.

5.The defendants 1 to 10 having remained exparte.

6.For substantiating its version, the plaintiff bank got examined

P.W.1 and got marked Exs.A.1 to A.10.

7.Arguments of the learned counsel for the plaintiff bank are heard and perused the record in detail.

8.Hearing of the plaintiff's counsel and perusal of the record leave a point for consideration which is “as to whether or not, the suit claim requires entertaining and upholding”.

POINT:

Bhavani Podupu Lakshmi Group” of Allagadda, all the defendants nominated and elected D.1 G.R.A.Siva Lakshmi and D.2 A.Saraswathi as first and second leaders respectively of the said group as seen from inter se agreement Ex.A.3, all the defendants, by passing Ex.A.4 resolution, authorized defendants 1 and 2 for borrowing loan from the plaintiff bank for the upliftment of the said selfhelp group, based on Exs.A.3 and A.4, the defendants 1 and 2, by submitting Ex.A.1 loan application to and by entering into Ex.A.2 articles of agreement with the plaintiff bank, sought for loan of Rs.5,00,000/ from the plaintiff bank, the plaintiff bank, after scrutiny of the submitted documents, sanctioned the sought loan by way of issuing Ex.A.5 Arrangement letter on a stipulation that the borrowed loan amount shall be discharged in 48 equal monthly installments at the rate of Rs.10,417/ per month, being principal, with accrued interest payable as per Reserve Bank of India norms, starting from 13.9.2008 in furtherance of Ex.A.5, the sanctioned loan was disbursed to the defendants through their account bearing No.30455961746 as seen from

Ex.A.10 Account Extract, subsequent to the borrowing of loan from the plaintiff bank, none of the defendants discharged the loan due amount to the plaintiff bank, on the demands made by the personnel of the plaintiff bank, the defendants 1 and 2, being leaders of the selfhelp group, executed Exs.A.6 to A.8 revival letters on 10.5.2011, 10.11.2013 and 20.9.2015 respectively by acknowledging the liability of the loan due amount, even after execution of the said revival letters and despite repeated demands made by the personnel of the plaintiff bank, the defendants did not discharge the loan due amount to the plaintiff bank which got issued Ex.A.9 demand notice dt.2.11.2011 to the defendants, despite the said legal correspondence, the defendants did not respond which forced the plaintiff bank to file the suit seeking recovery of the plaint 4 mentioned amount of Rs.6,68,184/ with subsequent interest and costs, to be true.

10.Therefore, this Court, in view of the afore discussion, felt that it is left with no other way than to uphold the suit claim.

11.In the result, this Court decrees the suit with costs in favour of the plaintiff bank and against the defendants 1 to 10 mandating the defendants 1 to 10 for payment of an amount of Rs.6,68,184/, with interest pendentelite at the rate of 10.5% p.a. and postlite at the rate of 6% p.a. reckonable on the suit amount of Rs.6,68,184/, to the plaintiff bank.

Typed to my dictation, corrected, signed and pronounced by me in the open Court, this the 4th day of September, 2019.

SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE,

ALLAGADDA.

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

Witnesses Examined

For Plaintiff:For Defendants 1 to 10: P.W.1: P.Srikanth. None

EXHIBITS MARKED

For Plaintiff: Ex.A.1: Application submitted by the first and second defendants to the plaintiff bank, dated 13.8.2008.

Ex.A.2: Articles of agreement executed by the first and second defendants in favour of the plaintiff bank dated 13.8.2008.

Ex.A.3: Interse agreement executed by the defendants in favour of the plaintiff bank dated 13.8.2008.

Ex.A.4: Resolution passed by the defendants dated 13.8.2008.

Ex.A.5: Arrangement letter signed by first and second defendants

dated 13.8.2008.

Ex.A.6: Revival letter executed by first and second defendants in favour of the plaintiff bank dated 10.5.2011.

Ex.A.7: Revival letter executed by first and second defendants in favour of the plaintiff bank dated 10.11.2013.

Ex.A.8: Revival letter executed by first and second defendants in favour of the plaintiff bank dated 20.9.2015.

Ex.A.9: Legal notice issued to the defendants dated 2.11.2011.

Ex.A.10. Account extract, dated 29.8.2018.

For Defendants 1 to 10 : Nil

SCJ, ALG.

IN THE COURT OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, ALLAGADDA.

Present: Sri Velamala Naresh, Senior Civil Judge, Allagadda.

Wednesday, the 4th day of September, 2019.

Original Suit No.161/2018

Represented by its Chief Manager. ... Plaintiff

Versus

1. G.R.A.Siva Lakshmi, W/o Prathap Singh, aged about 51 years, H.No.12551, Hindu

2. A.Saraswathi, W/o Vijay Singh, aged about 44 years, H.No.12552, Hindu

3. R.Santhoshi Bai, D/o Prathap Singh, aged about 29 years, H.No.12551, Hindu

4. B.Rama Thulasi, W/o Srinivasulu, aged about 37 years, H.No.12551, Hindu

5. A.Sangeetha, W/o Siva Ram Singh, aged about 34 years, H.No.12553, Hindu

6. S.Rasool Bee, W/o Moddin Saheb, aged about 57 years, H.No.12557, Muslim

7. S.Fathima Bee, W/o Yashin Basha, aged about 51 years, H.No.12558, Muslim

8. S.Mabu Chand, W/o Mabasha, aged about 35 years, H.No.12559, Muslim

9. A.Deepa, W/o Prathap Singh, aged about 31 years, Hindu, H.No125510

10.R.Basanthi, W/o Prathap Singh, aged about 28 years, Hindu, H.No.1255 All are Housewives, R/o S.V.Palace Street, 12th Ward, Ramalakshmi Kottala, Allagadda Town and Mandal, Kurnool District. … Defendants

Suit filed by the plaintiff bank against the defendants who formed as selfhelp group by name “Sri Bhavani Podupu Lakshmi Group of

Allagadda” seeking recovery of the plaint mentioned amount of

Rs.6,68,184/, along with interest and costs of the proceedings which is alleged to be due to it from the defendants in connection with the loan transaction, dated 13.8.2008.

Plaint presented on 5.9.2018 and filed on 27.09.2018.

J.V of Rs.6,68,184/ and C.F of Rs.9,126/ is paid under Sec.20 of A.P.C.F & S.V. Act, 1956.

This suit came up for final hearing before me on 9.8.2019 in the presence of Sri P.S.Mahaboob Basha and Sri U.Prathap, Advocates for the

Plaintiff Bank, and the defendants 1 to 10 having remained exparte, upon hearing the counsel for the plaintiff, this Court doth Order and passed the decree as follows:

1) That the defendants 1 to 10 do pay an amount of Rs.6,68,184/, with interest pendentelite at the rate of 10.5% p.a. and postlite at the rate of 6% p.a. reckonable on the suit amount of Rs.6,68,184/, to the plaintiff bank;

2) That the defendants 1 to 10 do also pay to the plaintiff bank a sum of Rs.23,140/ being the costs of the suit.

Given under my hand and seal of this Court, this the 4th day of September, 2019.

SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE,

ALLAGADDA.

Memo of Costs

For PlaintiffFor D2 Stamp on plaint 9,12600 Stamp on Vakalath200200 Stamp on process96000 Advocate’s Fee10,87300Ex parte Publication charges2,07900 Typing Charges10000

Total 23,14000 200

]

SCJ, ALG.

OS/168/2018

Mooragudi Rama Mohan Reddy vs Uddandam Upendra

04 Sep 2019

IN THE COURT OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE::ALLAGADDA

Present: Sri Velamala Naresh, Senior Civil Judge, Allagadda.

Wednesday, the 4th day of September, 2019.

Original Suit No.168/2018.

Mooragudi Rama Mohan Reddy … Plaintiff

Versus

Uddandam Upendra … Defendant

This suit came up for final hearing before me on 8.8.2019 in the presence of Sri S.Soma Sekhar Reddy, Advocate for the Plaintiff, the

Defendant having been set exparte, upon hearing the learned counsel for the Plaintiff and the matter having stoodover for consideration till today, this Court delivered the following:

JUDGMENT

Consequent to filing of suit, with the following averments, by the plaintiff against the defendant seeking recovery of an amount of

Rs.5,15,600/ which is alleged to be due to him from the defendant in connection with the suit promissory note transaction dated 25.9.2015, the present judgment arises.

2.For meeting his family necessities, the defendant, on 25.9.2015, borrowed an amount of Rs.3,00,000/ from the plaintiff at

Gumparmanudinne Village of Sirvel Mandal and to that effect he executed the suit promissory note in favour of the plaintiff by agreeing to repay the borrowed amount with interest at the rate of 24% p.a., subsequent thereto, the defendant did not repay the due amount of the suit promissory note to the plaintiff despite his demands which forced the plaintiff to file the suit.

3.With the said averments, the plaintiff requested the Court to pass a decree in his favour and against the defendant mandating the defendant for payment of the suit claim amount of Rs.5,15,600/ with subsequent interest and costs to him.

4.The defendant remained ex parte.

5.For substantiating his version, the plaintiff got himself examined as P.W.1 and got marked Ex.A.1.

6.Arguments of learned counsel for the plaintiff are heard and perused the record in detail.

7.Hearing of plaintiff’s counsel and perusal of record leave a short but crucial point for consideration which is “as to whether or not, the suit claim of the plaintiff requires upholding”.

8.Consequent to becoming exparte of the defendant, both oral and documentary evidence adduced by the plaintiff, by remaining on the record unimpeached, being unchallenged, establishes the contention of the plaintiff advanced in the suit, to be true.

9.Therefore, this Court, in view of the afore discussion, felt that it is left with no other way than to hold that the liability outfit covered under Ex.A.1 remained due from the defendant to the plaintiff yet.

10.In view of the substance of the immediate preceding paragraph, a factual question that arises for consideration is as to whether or not, the claimed rate of interest of 24% p.a. is tenable under law.

11.Though the defendant, by remaining exparte, did not challenge the quantum of interest claimed in the suit, yet the claimed rate of interest at 24% p.a. primafacie appears to be harsh.

12.In view of the substance of the immediate preceding paragraph, another question that arises for consideration is as to awarding of what rate of interest meets ends of justice.

13.In the present society, all nationalized banks and authorized financial institutions lend amounts to their borrowers on interest at an aggregate rate of 18% p.a., consequently, this Court feels and holds that awarding of interest at the rate of 18% p.a. would meet the ends of justice.

14.In view of the afore discussion, this Court holds that the plaintiff is entitled to recover the lent amount with interest at the rate of not 24% but 18% p.a.

15.In the result, the suit is decreed with proportionate costs in favour of the plaintiff and against the defendant mandating the defendant for payment of an amount of Rs.4,61,700/ with interest pendentelite at the rate of 12% and postlite at the rate of 6% p.a. reckonable on the adjudged principal amount of Rs.3,00,000/, to the plaintiff.

Typed to my dictation, corrected, signed and pronounced by me in the open Court, this the 4th day of September, 2019.

SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE,

ALLAGADDA.

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

Witnesses Examined

For Plaintiff: For Defendant:

PW.1 M.Rama Mohan ReddyNone

EXHIBITS MARKED

For Plaintiff: Ex.A.1 Original promissory note dated 25.9.2015 for Rs.3,00,000/.

For Defendant: Nil

SCJ, ALG.

IN THE COURT OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE::ALLAGADDA

Present: Sri Velamala Naresh, Senior Civil Judge, Allagadda.

Wednesday, the 4th day of September, 2019.

Original Suit No.168/2018.

Mooragudi Rama Mohan Reddy … Plaintiff Son of Pulla Reddy, Hindu, aged 48 years, Agriculturist, R/o H.No.223, Gumparmanudinne Village, Sirvella Mandal, Kurnool District.

Versus

Uddandam Upendra, Son of Subramanyam,… Defendant Aged about 45 years, Hindu, Business, R/o H.No.7180D26, Nadigadda, Nandyal Village and Mandal, Kurnool District.

Suit filed by the plaintiff against the defendant seeking recovery of an amount of Rs.5,15,600/ which is alleged to be due to him from the defendant in connection with the suit promissory note transaction dated 25.9.2015, for Rs.3,00,000/, for subsequent interest and for costs.

Plaint presented on 24.9.2018 and filed on 1.10.2018.

J.V of Rs.5,15,600/ and C.F of Rs.7,626/ is paid under Sec.20 of

A.P.C.F & S.V. Act, 1956.

Cause of action for the suit arose at Gumparmanudinne village,

Sirvella mandal on 25.9.2015 when the defendant executed the suit promissory note in favour of the plaintiff and when the plaintiff orally demanded the defendant to discharge the suit pronote debt, which is within the jurisdiction of this Court. [

This suit came up for final hearing before me on 8.8.2019 in the presence of Sri S.Soma Sekhar Reddy, Advocate for the Plaintiff, the

Defendant having set exparte, upon hearing the learned counsel for the

Plaintiff, this Court doth Order and decree as follows:

That the defendant do pay to the plaintiff an amount of 1. Rs.4,61,700/ with interest pendentelite at the rate of 12% and 5 postlite at the rate of 6% p.a. reckonable on the adjudged

principal amount of Rs.3,00,000/.

2. That the defendant do also pay to the plaintiff, the sum of

Rs.15,069/ being the proportionate costs of suit.

Given under my hand and seal of this Court, this the 4th day of September, 2019.

SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE,

ALLAGADDA.

MEMO OF COSTS

For PlaintiffFor Defendant Rs.Rs. Stamp on plaint 7,12600 Stamp on Vakalath200200 Stamp on process6500 Advocate’s Fee7,77600Ex parte Typing Charges10000 Total15,06900 200

S.C.J., Alg.

OS/3/2019

Onteddu Narasimha Reddy vs Yethepu Gureddy

13 Sep 2019

IN THE COURT OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE::ALLAGADDA

Present: Sri Velamala Naresh, Senior Civil Judge, Allagadda.

Friday, the 13th day of September, 2019.

Original Suit No.03/2019

Onteddu Narasimha Reddy, Son of Veera Reddy, Hindu, aged about 66 years, Rtd. Employee, R/o.H.No.7897, T.B.Road, Allagadda Town and Mandal, Kurnool District. … Plaintiff.

Versus

Yethapu Gureddy, Son of Gureddy, Hindu, aged about 44 years, Business, R/o.H.No.8671/2, Rama Subba Reddy Street, Allagadda Town and Mandal, Kurnool District. … Defendant

This suit came up for final hearing before me on 13.9.2018 in the presence of Sri G.Aswartha Reddy, Sri N.K.Venu Gopal and Sri

H.C.V.Sekhar Babu, Advocates for the plaintiff and the defendant having remained exparte, having perused the material on record, this Court delivered the following:

JUDGMENT

Consequent to filing of mortgage suit for sale, with the following averments, by the plaintiff against the defendant seeking preliminary decree of mortgage for sale for consequential recovery the suit claim amount of Rs.24,22,500/ which is alleged to be due to the plaintiff from the defendant in connection with the mortgage transaction dated 0608 2015, the present judgment arises.

2.For meeting his family necessities, the defendant, on 0608 2015, having borrowed an amount of Rs.15,00,000/ from the plaintiff at

Allagadda, executed a simple mortgage deed by mortgaging the plaint schedule mentioned property measuring 99.88 square yards covered by

Sy.Nos.275/A(old) and 275/A1(New) of Allagadda village with the plaintiff and they got registered the mortgage with the Sub Registrar, Allagadda by agreeing to repay the borrowed amount with interest at the rate of 18% p.a. to the plaintiff.

3.Despite repeated demands made by the plaintiff, the defendant, by postponing the issue on one reason or the other, did not discharge the liability amount covered by the mortgage deed dated 2 06082015 consequently the plaintiff was forced to get issued a demand notice dt.21112017 to the defendant however the demand notice addressed to the defendant was returned unserved with an endorsement as “addressee left”, even after the said legal notice, the defendant did not respond which forced the plaintiff to get filed the present suit.

4. With the said averments, the plaintiff requested the Court to pass in his favour and against the defendant a preliminary decree of mortgage for sale of plaint schedule mentioned mortgage security property for consequential recovery of the liability amount covered by the registered mortgage deed dt.06082015 apart from costs of the proceedings by the plaintiff.

5.The defendant remained exparte.

6.For substantiating his version, the plaintiff got himself examined as P.W.1 and got marked Ex.A.1 to Ex.A.3.

7.Arguments of learned counsel for the plaintiff are heard and perused the record in detail.

8.Hearing of plaintiff’s counsel and perusal of record leave a short but crucial point for consideration which is “as to whether or not, the suit claim of the plaintiffs requires upholding”.

9.Consequent to becoming exparte of the defendant, both oral and documentary evidence adduced by the plaintiff, by remaining on the record unimpeached, being unchallenged, establishes the contention of the plaintiff advanced in the suit to be true.

10.Therefore this Court, in view of the afore discussion, felt that it is left with no other way than to hold that the liability outfit covered under Ex.A.1 mortgage deed remained due from the defendant to the plaintiff yet.

11.In the result, this court, while granting preliminary decree of mortgage of sale with costs in favour of the plaintiff and against the defendant mandating the defendant for payment of an amount of

Rs.24,22,500/ with interest pendentlite at the rate of 12% and postlite at the rate of 6% p.a reckonable on the principal amount of 3

Rs.15,00,000/ to the plaintiff within 3 months from today which period is stipulated for redemption, failing which the plaintiff would be at liberty for obtaining final decree of mortgage by making separate application to that effect as per law.

Typed to my dictation by the Typist, corrected, signed and

pronounced by me in the open Court, this the 13th day of September, 2019.

SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE,

ALLAGADDA.

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

Witnesses Examined

For Plaintiff: For Defendant:

P.W.1: Onteddu Narasimha ReddyNone

EXHIBITS MARKED

For Plaintiff: Ex.A.1: Registered Mortgage deed, dated 6.8.2015. Ex.A.2: Office copy of legal notice, dated 21.11.2017. Ex.A.3. Unserved postal cover with Acknowledgement Card.

For Defendant: Nil

SCJ, ALG.

OS/195/2018

Mulla Alamsagari Joharaddin vs Thimmanna Gari Chinna Subbarayudu

04 Sep 2019

IN THE COURT OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, ALLAGADDA.

PRESENT : Sri Velamala Naresh, Senior Civil Judge, Allagadda.

Wednesday, the 4th day of September, 2019.

O.S.No.195/2018

Mulla Alamsagari Joharaddin, s/o.Khaja Mohiddin, aged 55 years, Muslim, Cultivation, R/o.H.No.17-99, Chagalamarri Village and Mandal, Kurnool District. …Plaintiff -Versus- Thimmanna Gari Chinna Subbarayudu, s/o.Chinna Subbanna aged 54 years, Hindu, Cultivation, R/o.H.No.1-12, Nagallapadu Village,Chagalamarri Mandal, Kurnool District.…. Defendant

This is a suit for specific performance on sale Agreement directing the defendant to execute regular sale deed in favour of plaintiff with defendant fails to execute the regular sale deed within the stipulated time court itself execute the sale deed in favour of the plaintiff and costs of the suit.

Plaint presented on 08-08-2018 and registered on 28-12-2018. J.V.

of Rs.4,80,000 and court fee of Rs.7,226/- is paid under section 39 of

APCF and SV Act.

The cause of Action for the suit arose on 25-3-2018 when the defendant executed on agreement of sale at Chagalamarri village and mandal in favour of the plaintiff in respect of the plaint schedule property and on 14-4-2018, 12-6-2018 when the plaintiff got issued a legal notices to the defendant. The suit schedule property is situated with in the limits of Nallapadu village which is with in the Jurisdiction of the court.

This suit came up before me for final hearing in the presence of

Sri P.S.Mahaboob Basha, Advocate for the Plaintiff and defendant remained set exparte and having stood over for consideration till today, this Court doth Order and passed the decreetal order as follows;-

1) that the suit be and the same is hereby dismissed as not pressed;

2) that there shall be no order as to costs.

Given under my hand and seal of the court, this the 4th day of

September, 2019.

SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE,

ALLAGADDA.

Page 2

Memo of Costs

For plaintif For Defendant

Stamp on VakalatRs. 2-00 - Stamp on plaint Rs.7,226-00– Stamp on processRs. 80-00– Publication chargesRs. -– Advocate’s Fee Nil– (Not certified) Writing ChargesRs. 50-00 - Typing ChargesRs. 50-00 - ------------------ -----–------------ Total: Rs. 7408-00 -

----------------- -------------------

SCJ,ALG.

Schedule

Land situated in Kurnool District, Nandyal Registration District, Allagadda Sub Registration District within the village limits of Nagallapadu, H/o.Kalugotlapale Village.

Item No.1

Sy.No.369an extent of Ac.0-94 cents

East: Land of Dimam Obanna

West: Rastha

North:Land of Bodanam Balaiah

South:Land of Chinna Subbarayudu

Item No.2

Sy.No.341/6an extent of Ac.0-03 cents(RCC House and site)

East: Rastha

West: House of Gagguturi Babu

North:House of Balaiah

South:House of Lakshmaiah

Item No.3

Sy.No.337an extent of Ac.0-06 cents(Kallam)

East: Kallam of Karre Subbaryudu

West: Rastha

North:Kallam of B.Seeta Rami Reddy

South:Kallam of karre Subbaryudu

SCJ,ALG.

IN THE COURT OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, ALLAGADDA.

PRESENT : Sri Velamala Naresh, Senior Civil Judge, Allagadda.

Wednesday, the 4th day of September, 2019.

O.S.No.195/2018

This suit came up before me for final hearing in the presence of Sri

P.S.Mahaboob Basha, Advocate for the Plaintiff and defendant remained set exparte and having stood over for consideration till today, this Court delivered the following;-

JUDGMENT

Plaintiff counsel, through a memo, not pressed the suit. Hence suit is dismissed as not pressed.

Pronounced by me in the open court, this the 4th day of September,

2019.

SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE,

ALLAGADDA.

Appendix of Evidence

(Witnesses examined)

For Plaintif For Defendant

NoneNone

Exhibits marked

For Plaintif Nil

For Defendant Nil

SCJ, ALG.

Order Record 1,147 total

Case No.	Parties	Date	Type	Outcome
EP/41/2017	Ramireddygari Ramachandra Reddy vs Gangula Sreenivasa Reddy	16 Sep 2019	Copy of Order	—
H.M.O.P/19/2018	Raja Siva Sankar @ Naga Siva Sankar vs N.Venkata Mounika	16 Sep 2019	Copy of Order	—
OS/3/2019	Onteddu Narasimha Reddy vs Yethepu Gureddy	13 Sep 2019	Copy of Judgment	—
H.M.O.P/13/2019	Narsinga Nagaraju vs Ganganaboina Hymavathi	12 Sep 2019	Copy of Order	—
H.M.O.P/19/2018	Raja Siva Sankar @ Naga Siva Sankar vs N.Venkata Mounika	12 Sep 2019	Copy of Order	—
OS/161/2018	State Bank of India vs GRA Siva Lakshmi	04 Sep 2019	Copy of Judgment	—
OS/164/2018	State Bank of India vs Gajjala Ramanamma	04 Sep 2019	Copy of Judgment	—
OS/168/2018	Mooragudi Rama Mohan Reddy vs Uddandam Upendra	04 Sep 2019	Copy of Judgment	—
OS/195/2018	Mulla Alamsagari Joharaddin vs Thimmanna Gari Chinna Subbarayudu	04 Sep 2019	Copy of Judgment	—
H.M.O.P/9/2019	Thatireddy Mohan Reddy vs Nil	04 Sep 2019	Copy of Order	—
OS/60/2018	Golla Subbamma vs Battula Ramasubbamma	03 Sep 2019	Copy of Judgment	—
OS/65/2018	Talanki Satyanarayana vs Mandula Edukondalu	03 Sep 2019	Copy of Judgment	—
OS/129/2017	Maremaddu @ Maramadugula @ Maremadugula Naidu vs Maremaddu @ Maramadugula @ Maremadugula Bala Maddileti	03 Sep 2019	Copy of Judgment	—
H.M.O.P/35/2019	Garisaluri Manohar Reddy vs Garisaluri @ Mallu Praveena	03 Sep 2019	Copy of Order	—
EP/45/2015	Thota Naga Bhushanam vs Mandla Kondamma	30 Aug 2019	Copy of Order	—
OS/183/2018	Seelam Kirshna Veni vs Seelam Parvathamma	30 Aug 2019	Copy of Judgment	—
OS/101/2017	Kankara Adinarayana Reddy vs Dudekula Khasamma(Dudekula Peddanna(dued) by his L.Rs.)	29 Aug 2019	Copy of Judgment	—
OS/102/2017	Narla Seshaiah @ Chinnanna vs Dudekula Khasamma(Dudekula Peddanna(died( by his L.Rs.)	29 Aug 2019	Copy of Judgment	—
EP/5/2019	Ambati Lakshmi Narayana Reddy vs Marthala Ravindra Reddy	28 Aug 2019	Copy of Order	—
OS/4/2019	Vempalli Purushothamma Reddy vs Pagidela Jaya Sudha	28 Aug 2019	Copy of Judgment	—
H.M.O.P/29/2019	Thamminedi Eshwara Rao vs Thamminedi Hima Bindhu	28 Aug 2019	Copy of Order	—
OS/18/2013	V. Ganesh Venkata Rama Subba Reddy vs V. Narayana Reddy and 2 another	26 Aug 2019	Copy of Judgment	—
OS/106/2016	State Bank of India, Allagadda vs L.Vijaya Lakshmi	26 Aug 2019	Copy of Judgment	—
EP/4/2019	Ambati Lakshmi Narayana Reddy vs Lakkireddy Seshadri Reddy	22 Aug 2019	Copy of Order	—
EP/29/2017	Dudekula Khaja Hussain vs Vallampadu Mahaboob Bi	20 Aug 2019	Copy of Order	—
S.O.P/5/2017	Uppari Venkata Krishnayya vs Vs	19 Aug 2019	Copy of Order	—
EP/93/2018	B.V.Seshaphani vs P.Sekhar	16 Aug 2019	Copy of Order	—
IP/1/2017	Chinthaka Imam Hussain vs S.Mahamad Hussain	16 Aug 2019	Copy of Order	—
IP/27/2018	Gagera Nagaiah vs Avula Krishna Reddy	08 Aug 2019	Copy of Order	—
H.M.O.P/3/2019	Mandla Nanda Kumar vs Bhogyam Aruna	07 Aug 2019	Copy of Order	—
OS/179/2016	Chintakunta Surekha vs T.Guru Prasada Rao,	06 Aug 2019	Copy of Judgment	—
EP/48/2017	Kunam Lakshmi Narayana Reddy vs Karuvadi Madhavareddy	05 Aug 2019	Copy of Order	—
EP/91/2018	Yerram Vijaya Sekhara Reddy vs Gontla Pedda Gopalu	05 Aug 2019	Copy of Order	—
OS/33/2017	Bandi Subba Narayana Reddy vs Gorre Seshi Reddy	05 Aug 2019	Copy of Judgment	—
OS/162/2016	Bhemavaram Narasimhulu vs Gali Venkata Ramudu	05 Aug 2019	Copy of Judgment	—
OS/163/2016	Bhemavaram Nrusimha Gopal vs Gali Venkata Ramudu	05 Aug 2019	Copy of Judgment	—
EP/63/2018	Lakshmireddy Viswanatha Reddy vs Birru Yelia	17 Jul 2019	Copy of Order	—
H.M.O.P/17/2019	Dasari Suneetha vs Dasari Sanjeeva Raju	17 Jul 2019	Copy of Order	—
H.M.O.P/42/2018	Dornipati Prasanth vs Dornipati Devi	17 Jul 2019	Copy of Order	—
OS/58/2018	K.Prasad vs Y.Narayana	16 Jul 2019	Copy of Judgment	—
OS/157/2018	State Bank of India vs D.Mabu Sunni	16 Jul 2019	Copy of Judgment	—
OS/160/2018	State Bank of India vs S.Asiya Begum	16 Jul 2019	Copy of Judgment	—
H.M.O.P/20/2019	Pothula Chinna Babu vs Dasari Sujatha	15 Jul 2019	Copy of Order	—
H.M.O.P/37/2018	Seelam Mohan Kiran vs Smt Maddur Usha Rani	15 Jul 2019	Copy of Order	—
OS/7/2019	Edula Padmavathi vs Edula Siva Sankar Reddy	13 Jul 2019	Copy of Order	—
OS/8/2019	Netla Sukadhakara Reddy vs Edula Siva Samkara Reddy	13 Jul 2019	Copy of Order	—
OS/16/2017	Gadamsetty Ramanaiah vs Nerlapalle Vengamma	11 Jul 2019	Copy of Judgment	—
OS/84/2017	Yerram Narasimha Reddy vs Somula Rama Subba Reddy	11 Jul 2019	Copy of Judgment	—
H.M.O.P/5/2018	Yendra Lakshmi Narayana Reddy vs Yendra Rama Devi	10 Jul 2019	Copy of Order	—
H.M.O.P/1/2019	Kalingari Ramachandrudu vs Vsnil	08 Jul 2019	Copy of Order	—
H.M.O.P/35/2017	Banka Rama Mohan Yadav vs V.Seshikala @ Banka Seshikala	08 Jul 2019	Copy of Order	—
EP/11/2018	Dollu Pedda Venkateswarlu vs The Special Deputy Collector-cum-Land Acquisition Officer,	05 Jul 2019	Copy of Order	—
EP/13/2018	Chennakesavula Obulamma vs Special Deputy Collector LA	05 Jul 2019	Copy of Judgment	—
EP/14/2018	Chennakesavulu Furramma vs Special Deputy Collector	05 Jul 2019	Copy of Order	—
EP/15/2018	Y.Naga Lakshmamma vs Special Deputy Collector	05 Jul 2019	Copy of Order	—
EP/19/2018	Dollu Ramanaiah vs Special Deputy Collector(LA)	05 Jul 2019	Copy of Order	—
EP/20/2018	Y.Narsi Reddy vs Special Deputy Collector(LA)	05 Jul 2019	Copy of Order	—
EP/21/2018	Yagala Obulesu vs Special Deputy Collector(LA),	05 Jul 2019	Copy of Order	—
EP/23/2018	M.Mallikarjuna Setty vs Special Deputy Collector (LA)	05 Jul 2019	Copy of Order	—
EP/24/2018	M.Chandra Sekhar vs Special Deputy Collector(LA)	05 Jul 2019	Copy of Order	—
EP/25/2018	A.Rama Krishnudu vs Special Deputy Collector(LA)	05 Jul 2019	Copy of Order	—
H.M.O.P/40/2018	Basireni Venkata Lakshmi Devi vs MUddagari Lakshmaiah	04 Jul 2019	Copy of Order	—
IP/26/2016	Nichenametla Subramanyam vs Bhanumukkala Babu Rajendra Prasad	02 Jul 2019	Copy of Order	—
EP/38/2011	Marthala Bali Reddy vs Nandigam Lakshmi Devi and 3 otheers	01 Jul 2019	Copy of Order	—
OS/8/2018	Allam Narayana vs Desha Krishnudu	01 Jul 2019	Copy of Judgment	—
OS/52/2018	Edula Rama Swamy Reddy vs Mandula Yedukondalu	01 Jul 2019	Copy of Judgment	—
OS/53/2018	Edula Naga Lakshmamma vs Mandula Yedukondalu	01 Jul 2019	Copy of Judgment	—
OS/84/2011	Puduru Vijay Bhaskar Reddy and another vs Mukkamalla Vijaya Kumar Reddy	01 Jul 2019	Copy of Judgment	—
OS/90/2013	Yeddula Dasthagiri Reddy vs Yeddula Bala Dasthagiri reddy	01 Jul 2019	Copy of Judgment	—
OS/139/2018	Singathala Bhaskar Reddy vs Somula Siva Prasada Reddy	01 Jul 2019	Copy of Judgment	—
H.M.O.P/26/2019	Erigela Lakshmi Naga Jyothi vs Erigela Madileti Reddy	01 Jul 2019	Copy of Order	—
L.A.O.P/49/2013	Sri. S. Srinivasulu vs SPL., Deputy Collector, T.G.P., Nandyal.	01 Jul 2019	Copy of Order	—
L.A.O.P/50/2013	Sri. S. Venkateswarlu vs Spl. Dy..collector, Telugu Ganga Project, Nandyal	01 Jul 2019	Copy of Order	—
L.A.O.P/51/2013	Sri.Gaddam Sivasankar Reddy vs Spl. Dy..collector, Telugu Ganga Project, Nandyal	01 Jul 2019	Copy of Order	—
L.A.O.P/52/2013	Sri. S. Lakshmi Narasimhudu vs SPL., Deputy Collector, T.G.P., Nandyal.	01 Jul 2019	Copy of Order	—
L.A.O.P/53/2013	Sri. K. Thimma Reddy vs Spl. Dy..collector, Telugu Ganga Project, Nandyal	01 Jul 2019	Copy of Order	—
L.A.O.P/54/2013	S.Govinda Bhupal Reddy vs Spl. Dy..collector, Telugu Ganga Project, Nandyal	01 Jul 2019	Copy of Order	—
L.A.O.P/55/2013	Sri. G. C.Obul Reddy vs Spl. Dy..collector, Telugu Ganga Project, Nandyal	01 Jul 2019	Copy of Order	—
L.A.O.P/62/2013	Sri. T.G.Chinna Naganna vs Spl. Dy..collector, Telugu Ganga Project, Nandyal	01 Jul 2019	Copy of Order	—
L.A.O.P/63/2013	T.G. Mekalanna vs Spl. Dy..collector, Telugu Ganga Project, Nandyal	01 Jul 2019	Copy of Order	—
L.A.O.P/64/2013	T. Sunkamma vs Spl. Dy..collector, Telugu Ganga Project, Nandyal	01 Jul 2019	Copy of Order	—
L.A.O.P/65/2013	G. Bala Naganna vs Spl. Dy..collector, Telugu Ganga Project, Nandyal	01 Jul 2019	Copy of Order	—
L.A.O.P/66/2013	Smt., K.Sunkamma vs Spl. Dy..collector, Telugu Ganga Project, Nandyal	01 Jul 2019	Copy of Order	—
L.A.O.P/127/2013	Chitthari manthaiah vs Special Deputy Collector LAO, TGP,Nandyal	01 Jul 2019	Copy of Order	—
L.A.O.P/327/2013	S. Rajesh Kumar vs Special Deputy Collector LAO, TGP,Nandyal	01 Jul 2019	Copy of Order	—
L.A.O.P/328/2013	L.V. Linga Reddy. vs Special Deputy Collector LAO, TGP,Nandyal	01 Jul 2019	Copy of Order	—
L.A.O.P/329/2013	D. Pakkiraiah vs Special Deputy Collector LAO, TGP,Nandyal	01 Jul 2019	Copy of Order	—
L.A.O.P/330/2013	S.Sudhakar Reddy vs Special Deputy Collector, LAO, Nandayal	01 Jul 2019	Copy of Order	—
L.A.O.P/331/2013	J.sankaraiah vs Special Deputy Collector, LAO, Nandayal	01 Jul 2019	Copy of Order	—
L.A.O.P/332/2013	M.mallikarjunaprasad vs Special Deputy Collector, LAO, Nandayal	01 Jul 2019	Copy of Order	—
L.A.O.P/333/2013	D.venkataRamana vs Special Deputy Collector, LAO, Nandayal	01 Jul 2019	Copy of Order	—
L.A.O.P/334/2013	J.Laxmidevi vs Special Deputy Collector, LAO, Nandayal	01 Jul 2019	Copy of Order	—
L.A.O.P/335/2013	Smt., N. Lakshmamma vs Special Deputy Collector LAO, TGP,Nandyal	01 Jul 2019	Copy of Order	—
L.A.O.P/336/2013	G. Lakshmamma vs Special Deputy Collector LAO, TGP,Nandyal	01 Jul 2019	Copy of Order	—
L.A.O.P/337/2013	T. Subbarayudu vs Special Deputy Collector LAO, TGP,Nandyal	01 Jul 2019	Copy of Order	—
L.A.O.P/338/2013	K. Balachandrudu vs Special Deputy Collector LAO, TGP,Nandyal	01 Jul 2019	Copy of Order	—
L.A.O.P/339/2013	N. Pedda Venkatanna vs Special Deputy Collector LAO, TGP,Nandyal	01 Jul 2019	Copy of Order	—
L.A.O.P/340/2013	G. Narasimhudu vs Special Deputy Collector LAO, TGP, Nandyal	01 Jul 2019	Copy of Order	—
L.A.O.P/341/2013	T.G. Naga bhushi vs Special Deputy Collector LAO, TGP,Nandyal	01 Jul 2019	Copy of Order	—
L.A.O.P/342/2013	G. Subba Rao vs Special Deputy Collector LAO, TGP,Nandyal	01 Jul 2019	Copy of Order	—

Showing 100 of 1,147 orders — Log in to browse all pages.

Monthly Orders (Last 12 Months)

Sep 2019		14
Aug 2019		23
Jul 2019		71
Jun 2019		51
May 2019		20
Apr 2019		34
Mar 2019		43
Feb 2019		35
Jan 2019		33
Dec 2018		48
Nov 2018		100
Oct 2018		49

Frequently Asked Questions

How many cases has Velamala Naresh handled?

Velamala Naresh has handled 1210 court orders since 2017 at V Add District Complex, Allagadda. The average disposal rate is 45 orders per month.

What types of cases does Velamala Naresh hear?

Based on available records, Velamala Naresh primarily handles Civil matters (Original Suits, Execution Petitions) and Criminal matters (Sessions Cases) at V Add District Complex, Allagadda.

Where is Velamala Naresh currently posted?

Velamala Naresh is posted as Senior Civil Judge at V Add District Complex, Allagadda, Kurnool, Andhra Pradesh.

Are judgments by Velamala Naresh available online?

Yes. 5 judgments by Velamala Naresh are available on Legistro with full text, outcome, and sections cited.

How fast does Velamala Naresh dispose cases?

Velamala Naresh disposes approximately 45 cases per month, based on 1210 orders handled over their tenure at V Add District Complex, Allagadda.

Since when is Velamala Naresh serving?

Velamala Naresh has been serving at V Add District Complex, Allagadda since 2017.

Case Types

OS 35%

L 28%

EP 15%

H 9%

AS 7%

SC 3%

IP 3%

CMA 1%

Posting History

Jun 2017 — Sep 2019

Senior Civil Judge · 1,210 orders

Other Judges at this Court

Smt.S.Sailaja

Senior Civil Judge

816 orders

T.bhaskar

Junior Civil Judge

261 orders

D.Ammanna Raja

V Addl.District Judge,Allagadda

35 orders

← View all judges at V Add District Complex, Allagadda

Velamala Naresh

IN THE COURT OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, ALLAGADDA.

JUDGMENT

ALLAGADDA.

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

EXHIBITS MARKED

SCJ, ALG.

IN THE COURT OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, ALLAGADDA.

ALLAGADDA.

Memo of Costs

Total 15993­00 2­00

SCJ, ALG.

IN THE COURT OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, ALLAGADDA.

JUDGMENT

ALLAGADDA.

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

EXHIBITS MARKED

SCJ, ALG.

IN THE COURT OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, ALLAGADDA.

ALLAGADDA.

Memo of Costs

Total 23,140­00 2­00

SCJ, ALG.

Original Suit No.168/2018.

JUDGMENT

ALLAGADDA.

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

Witnesses Examined

For Plaintiff: For Defendant:

EXHIBITS MARKED

SCJ, ALG.

Original Suit No.168/2018.

ALLAGADDA.

MEMO OF COSTS

JUDGMENT

ALLAGADDA.

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

Witnesses Examined

For Plaintiff: For Defendant:

EXHIBITS MARKED

SCJ, ALG.

IN THE COURT OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, ALLAGADDA.

PRESENT : Sri Velamala Naresh, Senior Civil Judge, Allagadda.

Wednesday, the 4th day of September, 2019.

ALLAGADDA.

Memo of Costs

For plaintif For Defendant

----------------- -------------------

Schedule

IN THE COURT OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, ALLAGADDA.

PRESENT : Sri Velamala Naresh, Senior Civil Judge, Allagadda.

Wednesday, the 4th day of September, 2019.

JUDGMENT

ALLAGADDA.

Appendix of Evidence

(Witnesses examined)

For Plaintif For Defendant

Exhibits marked

SCJ, ALG.

Total 1599300 200

Total 23,14000 200