w w w . L a w y e r S e r v i c e s . i n



Kiran Kumar Dhappuri & Others v/s The State of Telangana., Rep., PP & Another


Company & Directors' Information:- KIRAN CORPORATION PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U17290PB2013PTC037221

Company & Directors' Information:- KIRAN AND COMPANY LIMITED [Amalgamated] CIN = U36990MH1947PLC005467

    CRLP No. 14297 of 2015

    Decided On, 02 March 2020

    At, High Court of for the State of Telangana

    By, THE HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE G. SRI DEVI

    For the Petitioner: J.P. Rao, Advocate. For the Respondents: Public Prosecutor TG.



Judgment Text


1. The present Criminal Petition is filed by the petitioners/ A-1 to A-4, under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., seeking to quash the proceedings initiated against them in Crime No.610 of 2015 of Women Police Station, Hyderabad (XIII Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Hyderabad) which was registered for the offences punishable under Sections 498-A, 494, 420, 497 and 506 of I.P.C.

2. The facts in issue are that the 2nd respondent/de facto complainant filed a private complaint before the XIII-Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Nampally Criminal Courts, Hyderabad, which was referred to the police under Section 156 (3) of Cr.P.C for investigation and report. Basing on the said reference, the Police, Women Police Station, Hyderabad, registered a case in Crime No.610 of 2015. The allegations in the complaint are that the 2nd respondent/de facto complainant is the father of one Jhansi Devi (hereinafter referred to as "the victim"). 1st petitioner/A-1 is the husband of victim; petitioner Nos.2 and 3/A-2 and A-3 are parents, 4th petitioner/A-4 is the sister and Accused No.5 is the second wife of the 1st petitioner/A-1. It is stated in the complaint that the victim studied Engineering and employed in Infosys, Hyderabad, prior to the marriage. The 2nd respondent/de facto complainant performed the marriage of the victim with the 1st petitioner/A-1 on 25.02.2007 as per Hindu Rites and Customs. At the time of marriage, petitioners/A-1 to A-4 demanded Rs. 5,00,000/- towards dowry, but the 2nd respondent/de facto complainant paid Rs. 3.00 lakhs and apart from that 10 tulas of gold ornaments to his daughter, two tulas of gold chian, one tula of gold ring to the 1st petitioner/A-1 and also 20 tulas of silver items, household articles and furniture worth Rs. 1.00 lakh were given to the petitioners/A-1 to A-4. After the marriage, the victim joined the 1st petitioner/A-1 at her in-law's house at Adilabad and after few days they both returned back to Hyderabad. The 1st petitioner/A-1 left for Bangalore as he was having employment there. After three months, the 1st petitioner/A-1 returned back to Hyderabad as he got job at Hyderabad and that the 1st petitioner/A-1 and the victim lived in the house of the 2nd respondent/de facto complainant for a period of one month and later shifted to a rented house at Mehadipatnam, Hyderabad, and they lived happily for some time. Thereafter, the 1st petitioner/A-1 started harassing the victim to give her total salary to him, but she agreed to give part of the salary as she will have her own personal expenses. It is further stated that the 1st petitioner/A-1, at the instigation of the 2nd petitioner/A-2, who used to visit them, started abusing the parents of the victim and that the victim informed the same to her parents, who in turn requested them not to harass the victim. However, the petitioners/A-1 to A-4 created a quarrel, assaulted and abused the victim and sent her to the 2nd respondent/de facto complainant's house, while she was carrying three months pregnancy. Thereafter, the petitioners/ A-1 to A-4 never visited the victim and that the 1st petitioner/A-1 refused to take any responsibility. The 2nd respondent/de facto complainant incurred all the medical expenses pertaining to the delivery of the victim. The 2nd respondent/de facto complainant invited the petitioners/A-1 to A-4 for naming ceremony of the child, they attended the function, but un-necessarily created a quarrel for the reasons best known to them and when the victim requested them not to create a scene, the petitioners/A-1 to A-4 abused them and left the place. The elders by name Mr.K.Vanamali and Mr.G.M.Mahatma, who were present at the time of naming ceremony function, observed the behaviour of the petitioners/ A-1, A-2 and A-4 and that they advised them not to harass the victim and requested the 1st petitioner/A-1 to take back the victim to his company. Due to the said mediation, the victim joined the company of the 1st petitioner/A-1 along with her child. The 2nd petitioner/A-2 joined the victim and the 1st petitioner/A-1 on the pretext that she will look after the child. The 1st petitioner/A-1 used to spend her total salary for his personal use without looking after the welfare of the child. It is further stated that on 15.12.2008, when the victim returned home from office in the evening, her child was crying with high fever. The 2nd petitioner/A-2 never informed the same nor tried to take the child to any doctor and when the victim requested the 1st petitioner/A-1 to come along with her to show the child to a children specialist, he refused for the same. In that situation, the victim informed the same to the 2nd respondent/de facto complainant, who came to their house and took the child to a doctor for treatment. On the same day night at about 10.00 P.M., petitioner Nos.1 and 2/A-1 and A-2 assaulted the victim mercilessly, abused her and necked her out from the house by snatching all her gold ornaments. Thereafter, the 2nd respondent/de facto complainant came along with his son and found the victim outside the house along with child and when he tried to request petitioner Nos.1 and 2/A-1 and A-2 to open the door, they refused to allow them inside the house. As there is no other alternative, the 2nd respondent/de facto complainant has taken the victim to his house and since then she is living with her parents. Later, the 2nd respondent/de facto complainant along with elders approached the petitioners/A-1 to A-4 and requested them not to harass the victim and to take her to the matrimonial house, but they refused to have any talks with them. Thereafter, the 2nd respondent/de facto complainant came to know that the 1st petitioner/A-1 left for U.S.A. without intimation to them. In spite of e-mail, dated 13.07.2009 sent by the victim to the 1st petitioner/A-1, there is no response from him. As there was no response from the 1st petitioner/A-1, the victim left for U.S.A. on 21.12.2009 and doing a job and since then her child namely, Siddartha, now aged about 8 years, is living with the parents of the victim. It is further stated that the 2nd respondent/de facto complainant got information that the petitioners/A-1 to A-4 have performed the marriage of the 1st petitioner/A-1 with another lady by name Jaya Lakshmi Jasthi (Accused No.5) at Arya Samaj, Sulthan Bazar, Hyderabad on 16.02.2011 and both are living happily at U.S.A. Thereafter, the 2nd respondent/de facto complainant approached the Manager, Arya Samaj, Sulthan Bazar, Hyderabad, and procured the marriage certificate of the 1st petitioner/A-1 with Accused No.5, dated 15.02.2011. Thus, the 1st petitioner/A-1, who cheated the 2nd respondent/de facto complainant and the victim with a mala fide intention and married another lady by suppressing the fact of his existing marriage, dated 25.02.2007 with the victim, filed Divorce O.P.No.605 of 2015 before the Family Court, City Civil Court, Hyderabad, left to U.S.A., without informing the victim.

3. Heard the learned Counsel for the petitioners/A-1 to A-4, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the 1st respondent-State and the learned Counsel for the 2nd respondent/de facto complainant and perused the record.

4. Learned Counsel for the petitioners/A-1 to A-4 would submit that the 1st petitioner/A-1 filed O.P.No.1211 of 2009, under section 9of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1995, for restitution of Conjugal Rights, which was dismissed for want of whereabouts of the victim; that the victim without any information to the 1st petitioner/A-1 left the Country and living separately since seven years; that the 1st petitioner/A-1 also filed O.P.No.605 of 2015, seeking divorce on the ground of desertion of continuous period of more than six years and the same is pending; that the 1st petitioner/A-1 sent e-mails to the victim on 02.06.2009 and 06.07.2009 requesting for settlement of the disputes amicably. He further submits that the 2nd petitioner/A-2 and the 3rd petitioner/A-3 are Senior Citizens and they are parents of the 1st petitioner/A-1 and after retirement of the 3rd petitioner/A-3 they have been living at Adilabad and never joined the family of the 1st petitioner/A-1 and they were unnecessarily roped with a malicious intention to harass them and that the allegation that the 2nd petitioner/A-2 instigated the 1st petitioner/A-1 etc., has been invented for the purpose of this complaint. He further submits that the second marriage of the 1st petitioner/A-1 with Accused No.5 is an inter caste marriage and is against the customs and rites of their community; that the complaint did not disclose any allegation against the 3rd petitioner/A-3. He further submits that the 4th petitioner/A-4 is the sister of the 1st petitioner/A-1 and she is living separately with her family and that the complaint does not disclose any specific incident of her involvement in the day-to-day life of the 1st petitioner/A-1 and the victim. He also submits that the Apex Court recently ruled that the High Courts can quash F.I.R. against a person, if it did not disclose any offence; that the ingredients of Section 498Aof I.P.C. do not applicable to the petitioners/A-1 to A-4 since the period of cohabitation of the 1st petitioner/A-1 and the victim is only for a limited period i.e., from 25.02.2007 to 15.12.2008 and during this period, the 1st petitioner/A-1 and the victim were living separately; that the ingredients of Section 494, 497and 420of I.P.C. are not applicable to petitioner Nos.2 to 4/A-2 to A-4 since the marriage between the 1st petitioner/A-5 is an inter caste marriage and that the complaint under Section 498Aof I.P.C. against the accused is not maintainable after a gap of more than seven years. He further submits that the complaint is irregular as the 2nd respondent/de facto complainant has no locus standi to file the complaint and the complaint suffers from basic requirements under Sections 198 and 198 (a) of Cr.P.C. He further submits that without making a complaint before police, the 2nd respondent/de facto complainant filed a private complaint under Section 200 Cr.P.C. in order to take vengeance against the petitioners/accused. In support of his contentions, he relied on the judgments of the Apex Court in Arnesh Kumar v. State of Bihar and another AIR 2014 SC 2756 ; Lalita Kumari v. Government of Uttar Pradesh (2014) 2 SCC 1 and K.Bharati @ Padma and another v. Chandrakala and another (2016) 1 ALD (Crl.) 579.

5. Learned Counsel for the 2nd respondent/de facto complainant reiterating the contents in the private complaint, would submit that the truth or otherwise of the allegations can only be decided after conducting investigation and the F.I.R. cannot be quashed at the threshold.

6. As seen from the allegations in the complaint, it reveals that there are no specific allegations against the petitioners/A-2 to A-4, except the bald and general allegation that the petitioners/A-2 to A-4 harassed the victim i.e., daughter of the 2nd respondent/de facto complainant physically and mentally for want of additional dowry. Since all the allegations are attributed against the 1st petitioner/A-1 only, the proceedings in Crime No.610 of 2015 of

Please Login To View The Full Judgment!

Women Police station, Hyderabad, against the petitioners/A2 to A-4 are liable to be quashed. 7. Insofar as the 1st petitioner/A1 is concerned, a perusal of the complaint and the material in support of the same, this Court does not find it to be a case which can be determined or gone into in an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. No such ground appears to be available to the 1st petitioner/A1 on the basis of which the impugned F.I.R. can be quashed going by the settled law in R.P.Kapur v. State of Punjab AIR 1960 SC 866 ; State of Haryana v. Bhajan Lal (1992) SCC (Cr.) 426 ; State of Bihar v. P.P.Sharma(1992) SCC (Cr.) 192 and Zandu Pharmaceutical Works Limited v. Mohd. Saraful Haque and another (2005) SCC (Cr.) 283. Hence, the prayer for quashing the proceedings in Crime No.610 of 2015 of Women Police Station, Hyderabad, insofar as the 1st petitioner/A1 is refused. 8. Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is allowed in part. The proceedings in Crime No.610 of 2015 of Women Police Station, Hyderabad, against the petitioners/A2 to A-4 are hereby quashed. 9. The Criminal Petition insofar as the 1st petitioner/A1 is dismissed. 10. Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending shall stand closed.
O R







Judgements of Similar Parties

24-06-2020 Bhima Jewellery & Diamonds (P) Ltd., Chevayoor, Represented By Its Director Girirajan Balachandra Kiran, Kozhikode Versus O. Sandeep Kumar High Court of Kerala
17-06-2020 Palla Shanthi Kiran Versus The State of A.P. rep. by Public Prosecutor, High Court Buildings, Amaravati & Another High Court of Andhra Pradesh
06-05-2020 M/s. Sai Kiran Hospital & Another Versus State of Telangana & Another High Court of for the State of Telangana
31-03-2020 Kiran Yadav Versus State of Rajasthan & Others High Court of Rajasthan Jaipur Bench
26-02-2020 M/s. Kiran Cold Storage Pvt. Ltd. Through Director Manohar Lal Ahuja, Uttar Pradesh Versus Yashpal National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
20-02-2020 Kiran Pal Saini Versus State of Uttarakhand High Court of Uttarakhand
19-02-2020 Union of India & Others Versus Ashes Kiran Prasad High Court of Delhi
18-02-2020 Kiran Limboo Versus Kussang Limboo & Another High Court of Sikkim
04-02-2020 Kiran Devi Agrawal & Others Versus State of Chhattisgarh & Others High Court of Chhattisgarh
15-01-2020 Kiran Kumari Versus State of Rajasthan Through Secretary High Court of Rajasthan Jodhpur Bench
09-01-2020 Kranti Kumar Versus Ku. Kiran Shrivastava & Others High Court of Chhattisgarh
11-12-2019 Shakuntala Gupta & Others Versus Kiran Bhartia High Court of Karnataka
09-12-2019 Kiran Bala Versus Omaxe Ltd. Delhi State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission New Delhi
29-11-2019 Vijay Kumar Gupta Versus Kiran Bala High Court of Chhattisgarh
28-11-2019 Kiran Pujar Versus State of Gujarat High Court of Gujarat At Ahmedabad
18-11-2019 Anup Kiran Versus Punjab State Federation Of Cooperative House Building Society Ltd. & Another National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
11-10-2019 Kiran Kulkarni Versus The Securities and Exchange Board of India SEBI Bhavan SEBI Securities amp Exchange Board of India Securities Appellate Tribunal
01-10-2019 Kiran Jain Versus Government of NCT of Delhi & Others High Court of Delhi
23-09-2019 Kiran Versus The State of Maharashtra In the High Court of Bombay at Aurangabad
17-09-2019 Samruddhi Developers Versus Kiran Vasant Verekar & Others High Court of Judicature at Bombay
19-08-2019 Akshay Kumar @ Kiran Versus State by Electronic City Police Station, Represented by the State Public Prosecutor, Bengaluru High Court of Karnataka
13-08-2019 Punjab National Bank Versus Kiran Shah, Interim Resolution Professional of Org Informatics Ltd. National Company Law Appellate Tribunal
31-07-2019 Kiran & Another Versus State of Maharashtra through PSO PS In the High Court of Bombay at Nagpur
29-07-2019 Kiran Banerjee & Others Versus National Insurance Company & Others High Court of Delhi
19-07-2019 Kiran Kirit Solanki Versus The State of Maharashtra & Others High Court of Judicature at Bombay
17-07-2019 Gurmit Singh Bhatia Versus Kiran Kant Robinson & Others Supreme Court of India
17-07-2019 Gurmit Singh Bhatia V/S Kiran Kant Robinson and Others. Supreme Court of India
15-07-2019 Rajeswari Versus Kiran & Others Before the Madurai Bench of Madras High Court
05-07-2019 Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. Versus Kiran Devi & Others High Court of Delhi
04-07-2019 Kiran Versus The State of Maharashtra Through its Principal Secretary Co-operation & Textile Department & Others In the High Court of Bombay at Aurangabad
26-06-2019 Kiran Devi Versus Philomena & Another High Court of Judicature at Madras
10-06-2019 Ramchandra & Others Versus Kiran & Others In the High Court of Bombay at Nagpur
03-06-2019 Kiran Murali & Another Versus Computer Sciences Corporation India Pvt. Ltd., (A Company incorporate under the Companies Act, 1956) Having its Office at Softward Technology Park, Electronics Complex, Madhya Pradesh & Another High Court of Judicature at Madras
12-04-2019 Thiyam Kiran Singh V/S Union of India Represented by its Secretary & Others Central Administrative Tribunal Guwahati Bench Guwahati
11-04-2019 Sri Ram Transport Finance Company Limited & Others Versus Kiran Devi Himachal Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Shimla
08-04-2019 Munish Kalra Versus Kiran Madan & Others High Court of Delhi
29-03-2019 Mittapalli Kiran Kumar Versus The State of Telangana & Others High Court of for the State of Telangana
22-03-2019 Smita V/S Kiran M. Patil and Others. In the High Court of Bombay at Aurangabad
06-03-2019 Amonchit Suriya Kiran & Another Versus National Restaurant & Others High Court of Delhi
26-02-2019 Kiran Versus The State of Maharashtra & Another In the High Court of Bombay at Aurangabad
20-02-2019 D. Kiran Versus K. Ramesh High Court of Karnataka
31-01-2019 R. Ambika Versus R. Kiran Kumar High Court of Karnataka
29-01-2019 Mahesh Chandra Gupta Versus Kiran Gupta & Another High Court of Madhya Pradesh
14-01-2019 Kiran Versus State High Court of Delhi
02-01-2019 Kiran Singh Versus State of Rajasthan High Court of Rajasthan Jaipur Bench
28-12-2018 K. Kiran Kumar & Others Versus State of Telangana, rep. by its Chief Secretary, General Administration (Law & Order) Department & Others High Court of Andhra Pradesh
22-12-2018 Mukesh J. Shah Versus Kiran Mukesh Shah nee Chandrakant Shah & Others High Court of Judicature at Bombay
22-12-2018 Pundalik & Others Versus Kiran & Another In the High Court of Bombay at Nagpur
19-12-2018 Kiran Dhawan Versus Vivek Mittal & Another High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
05-12-2018 Kiran Shankar Rawool & Others Versus Eastern International Hotel & Others High Court of Judicature at Bombay
26-11-2018 Kiran Agrawal & Another Versus JDA & Others High Court of Rajasthan Jodhpur Bench
23-10-2018 Kiran Joshi Versus S.M.V. Agencies Pvt. Limited National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
28-09-2018 Kiran Kadam Versus The State of Maharashtra & Others High Court of Judicature at Bombay
03-09-2018 Kiran Shaji Versus State of Kerala, Represented by The Secretary to Government, Home & Vigilance Department, Thiruvananthapuram & Others High Court of Kerala
08-08-2018 Kiran @ Babli & Another Versus State High Court of Delhi
06-08-2018 Shri Kiran Brahma, Assam Versus The State of Assam High Court of Gauhati
30-07-2018 Dulal Chand Nandi Decd thr LRS Versus Kiran Bala Mehru & Another High Court of Delhi
16-07-2018 Kiran @ Shailesh & Another Versus The State of Maharashtra Through Police Inspector & Another In the High Court of Bombay at Aurangabad
11-07-2018 Shri Kiran Versus The State of Maharashtra In the High Court of Bombay at Nagpur
09-07-2018 Kiran Pal Versus State of U.P. High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
06-07-2018 Shivam Steels Versus Y. Kiran Kumar High Court of Madhya Pradesh
01-06-2018 Kaushalya Sharma Versus Kiran Devi & Others High Court of Delhi
17-05-2018 Kiran Pal Singh Versus The State of Uttar Pradesh & Others Supreme Court of India
15-05-2018 Kiran Joshi Versus S.M.V. Agencies Pvt. Ltd National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
03-05-2018 Kiran Dhanraj Kharat Versus The Commissioner of Police, Pune & Others High Court of Judicature at Bombay
03-04-2018 Kiran Mehta Versus Lila Devi High Court of Judicature at Patna
28-02-2018 Kiran Mantry & Another Versus M/s. G. Kothari Constructions & Developers Pvt. Ltd. & Another West Bengal State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Kolkata
27-02-2018 K. Ratna Kishore Versus Dr. Yekula Kiran Kumar & Another High Court of Andhra Pradesh
26-02-2018 Union of India Versus Dr. Kiran Jadhav, IPS & Others High Court of Judicature at Bombay
01-02-2018 Kumari Kiran Choudhary, Jodhpur Versus U.O.I. Through General Manager, North Western Railway, Jaipur & Others High Court of Rajasthan Jodhpur Bench
31-01-2018 M/s. Suchir India Properties Pvt. Ltd. Rep. by its Chief Executive Officer, Y. Kiran Kumar & Another Versus Ch. Narayan Reddy & Another Telangana State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Hyderabad
22-01-2018 Kiran Maheshwari Versus State of Rajasthan, Through the Public Prosecutor & Another High Court of Rajasthan Jodhpur Bench
20-01-2018 Dr. Kiran Anant Deshpande Versus The State of Maharashtra, through Anti Corruption Bureau, Nagpur In the High Court of Bombay at Nagpur
18-01-2018 Indian Overseas Bank V/S Kiran Enterprises and Others. Debts Recovery Tribunal Chandigarh
15-01-2018 Kiran & Others Versus The State of Maharashtra Through Secretary Technical Education Department Mantralaya & Others In the High Court of Bombay at Aurangabad
09-01-2018 Kiran Suresh Bhagiya Versus M/s. Kakade Construction Co. Pvt. Ltd. & Another High Court of Judicature at Bombay
19-12-2017 The Divisional Controller Versus Kiran Laxman Chabukswar In the High Court of Bombay at Aurangabad
12-12-2017 M/s. Kiran Gems Pvt. Ltd. Versus Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
29-11-2017 Thiyam Kiran Singh Versus The Union of India, rep. by its Secretary, Ministry of Home Affairs & Others Central Administrative Tribunal Guwahati Bench Guwahati
28-11-2017 Ravi Kiran Monigari Versus M/s Safeway Infra a partnership Firm Rep. by its Managing Partner IVSN Raju & Others Telangana State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Hyderabad
01-11-2017 Kiran Bhai Kapadiya & Others Versus State & Another High Court of Rajasthan
24-10-2017 Raj Kumar Sethi & Another Versus Janki Devi @ Usha Kiran High Court of Delhi
23-10-2017 Dr. J. Kiran Kumar & Others Versus The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Secretary, Medical, Health & Family Welfare (E1) Department, Secretariat & Others In the High Court of Judicature at Hyderabad
22-09-2017 Kiran Vati & Others Versus Union of India High Court of Delhi
22-09-2017 Commissioner of Central Excise and Customs V/S Kiran Elastomers Pvt. Ltd. Customs Excise Service Tax Appellate Tribunal West Zonal Bench At Mumbai
15-09-2017 Kiran Singh Versus State of Uttar Pradesh High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
19-07-2017 R. Kiran Kumar Versus State of Karnataka Department of Human Rights & Justice Bangalore & Others High Court of Karnataka
28-06-2017 New India Assurance Company Limited Versus Kiran & Others High Court of Madhya Pradesh Bench at Gwailor
15-06-2017 Purabi Borah Das Versus Kiran Saikia High Court of Gauhati
17-04-2017 M/s. Suchir India Developers Pvt Ltd., Rep. by is CEO Dr.Y.Kiran Kumar Versus Y. Srilakshmi Telangana State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Hyderabad
13-04-2017 Rahul Verma Versus Kiran Verma High Court Of Judicature At Allahabad Lucknow Bench
12-04-2017 M/s. Mahadev Logistics, Represented through its authorised Signatory Kiran Pandey Versus Customs & Central Excise Settlement Commission (Principal Bench) & Others High Court of Chhattisgarh
05-04-2017 C.M Auto Sales (P) Ltd. Versus Nav Kiran Dhaliwal daughter of Baldev Singh Dhaliwal & Others Punjab State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Chandigarh
08-03-2017 In Re: M/s Kiran Enterprise Versus M/s Abbott Healthcare Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai Competition Commission of India
21-02-2017 State of Rajasthan Versus Kiran Meena & Another Supreme Court of India
21-02-2017 Laxmibai Kiran Jaiswar Versus The State of Maharashtra through its Principal Secretary, Rural Development Department & Others In the High Court of Bombay at Aurangabad
14-02-2017 Divya Ramesh Versus N.S. Kiran/Sheshadri K. Nittur High Court of Karnataka
10-02-2017 M. Ravi Kiran & Another Versus M/s. Swarnamukhi Green Fields Pvt., Ltd. & Others Telangana State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Hyderabad
07-02-2017 N. Kiran Babu Versus M. Purushotham & Others In the High Court of Judicature at Hyderabad
25-01-2017 Kiran Arora widow of Shri Rajesh Arora & Others Versus Unitech Limited, a Public Limited Company duly incorporated under the Companies Act & Others Union Territory Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission UT Chandigarh