Vankayala Krishna Murthy vs Namburi Venkateswara Rao
2024 Latest Caselaw 6886 AP

Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati

Vankayala Krishna Murthy vs Namburi Venkateswara Rao on 8 August, 2024

APHC010002422004
                    IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA
                                PRADESH
                                                        [3369]
                             AT AMARAVATI
                      (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: 915/2004
Between:

   1. VANKAYALA KRISHNA MURTHY, S/O. SOMESWARA RAO
      BUSINESS,      AGED    ABOUT       55      YEARS,   R/O.
      AMALAPURAM, EAST GODAVARI DISTRICT.
   2. VANKAYALA SAKUNTALA DEVI, W/O. SOMESWARA RAO
      HOUSEWIFE, AGED ABOUT 75 YEARS, R/O. KAKINADA,
      EAST GODAVARI DISTRICT.
   3. VANKAYALA VENKATARATNA RAO, S/O. SOMESWARA
      RAO BUSINESS, AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS, R/O.
      KAKINADA, EAST GODAVARI DISTRICT.
   4. VANKAYALA CHAYARAMADEVI, W/O. SRIRAMCHANDRA
      MURTHY HOUSEWIFE, AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS, R/O.
      BANDARU STREET, INNISPETA, RAJAHMUNDRY,
   5. VANKAYALA VENKATA SOMA SURYA PHANI SUBHAS,,
      S/O. SRIRAMCHANDRA MURTHY, AGED ABOUT 30
      YEARS,      R/O.  BANDARU       STREET,       INNISPETA,
      RAJAHMUNDRY,
   6. VANKAYALA VENKATA NAGA SOMESWARA RAO, S/O.
      SRIRAMCHANDRA MURTHY, AGED ABOUT 25 YEARS,
      R/O. BANDARU STREET, INNISPETA, RAJAHMUNDRY,
   7. VANKAYALA VENKATA SESHA SASIDHAR, S/O.
      SRIRAMCHANDRA MURTHY, AGED ABOUT 23 YEARS,
      R/O. BANDARU STREET, INNISPETA, RAJAHMUNDRY,
                                              ...APPELLANT(S)
                             AND
   1. NAMBURI VENKATESWARA RAO, S/o. Nagaraju Business,
      r/O Amalapuram, East Godavari District.
                                               ...RESPONDENT

Counsel for the Appellant(S):

1. VL N G K MURTHY Counsel for the Respondent:

P.UDAYABHASKARA RAO

The Court made the following Judgment:

This Second appeal is filed under Section 100 of C.P.C by

the plaintiff against the Decree and Judgment in A.S.No.132 of

2000, dated 25-09-2003 on the file of Senior Civil Judge,

Amalapuram confirming Judgment and decree in O.S.No.166 of

1998 dated 01-11-2000 on the file of II-Additional Junior Civil

Judge, Amalapuram.

02. Learned counsel for respondent is present.

03. As the learned counsel for appellants is no more, this Court

has ordered notice to the appellants. Despite issuing of notice to

the appellants, notice of appellant Nos.1 to 3 returned with an

endorsement "insufficient address". Despite service of notice to

appellant Nos.4,5 and 7, it seems that they have not taken any

steps to engage counsel or to proceed with the appeal.

Notice to respondent No.6 returned with an endorsement of

'unclaimed'. The notice sent to the appellants to the address as

shown in the appeal. It seems that despite posting the matter

under the caption 'for dismissal', appellants have not chosen to

contest the matter.

04. In the said circumstances, this Court feels that appellants

are evincing interest to proceed with the matter.

05. In the result, the Second Appeal is dismissed for default.

No order as to costs.

Consequently, miscellaneous petitions if any, stand closed.

____________________________________ JUSTICE T. MALLIKARJUNA RAO

Date :08.08.2024 GRL