B.Mallappa,Holagunda,Kurnool vs K.Beelakantappa,Holagunda,Kurnool7 ...
2024 Latest Caselaw 6883 AP

Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati

B.Mallappa,Holagunda,Kurnool vs K.Beelakantappa,Holagunda,Kurnool7 ... on 8 August, 2024

 APHC010019492001
                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
                                    AT AMARAVATI                              [3369]
                             (Special Original Jurisdiction)

                    THURSDAY, THE EIGHTH DAY OF AUGUST
                      TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR

                                     PRESENT

         THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE T MALLIKARJUNA RAO

                        SECOND APPEAL NO: 991/2001

Between:

B.mallappa,holagunda,kurnool                                          ...APPELLANT

                                        AND

K Beelakantappa Holagunda Kurnool7 Ors                             ...RESPONDENT

Counsel for the Appellant:

1. V TULASI REDDY

Counsel for the Respondent:

1. B SARVOTHAM REDDY

The Court made the following JUDGMENT:

1. This Second Appeal has been filed by the Appellant/ Appellant/Appellant/Plaintiff Appellant/Plaintiff against the Decree and Judgment dated 21.03.2001, in A.S.No.33 of 1996 on the file of Senior Civil Judge, Adoni, (for short, 'the 1st Appellate Court') confirming the decree and Judgment dated 30.08.1996,, in O.S.No.14 O.S.No. of 1988 on the file of District Munsif Court, Court Alur (for short, 'the trial Court').

2. In the trial Court, Appellant/Appellant Appellant is s the Plaintiff, who filed the suit in O.S.No.14 of 1988, for Specific Performance of agreement dated 23.0 23.08.1975 executed by the Defendants 1 and 2 in favour of the Plaintiff, and direct the Defendants to execute a registered sale deed for Rs.5,330/ Rs.5,330/- in respect of plaint schedule property and if the Defendants fail to do so, the Court may execute a registered sale deed at the Plaintiff's cost.

Respondents/Respondents are the Defendants in the said suit.

3. In the morning session, when the matter was called for hearing, neither the Appellant nor the Respondents were represented. As a result of their absence, the matter was subsequently passed over until 2:15 PM.

4. In the afternoon session as well, there was no appearance on behalf of the Appellant. Despite the matter being specifically listed under the caption 'for dismissal', no representation was forthcoming on behalf of the Appellant. This consistent absence strongly indicates a lack of intent or interest on his part to further proceed with the Appeal.

5. Consequently, due to the persistent absence of the Appellant and his failure to appear, the Second Appeal is hereby dismissed for default. However, there shall be no order as to costs.

6. Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, in this Appeal, shall stand closed.

________________________ T. MALLIKARJUNA RAO, J

Date: 08.08.2024 SAK THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE T. MALLIKARJUNA RAO

Date: 08.08.2024

SAK