N.Prakasa Rao Vskp vs K.Appalacharyulu Vskp
2024 Latest Caselaw 7474 AP

Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati

N.Prakasa Rao Vskp vs K.Appalacharyulu Vskp on 21 August, 2024

 APHC010371392002
                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
                                    AT AMARAVATI                              [3369]
                             (Special Original Jurisdiction)

            WEDNESDAY, THE TWENTY FIRST DAY OF AUGUST
                 TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR

                                     PRESENT

         THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE T MALLIKARJUNA RAO

                          SECOND APPEAL NO: 827/2002

Between:

N.prakasa Rao Vskp                                                   ...APPELLANT

                                        AND

K Appalacharyulu Vskp                                             ...RESPONDENT

Counsel for the Appellant:

1. Y CHANDRASEKHAR

Counsel for the Respondent:

1. S RAJAN

The Court made the following JUDGMENT:

1. This Second Appeal has been filed by the Appellant/Appellant/ Appellant/Plaintiff against the Decree and Judgment dated 24.06.2002, in A.S.No.188 188 of 1999 Judge, Visakhapatnam,, (for short, 'the 1st on the file of Principal District Judge Appellate Court') confirming the decree and Judgment dated 26.06.1999, 26.06.1999 in O.S.No.90 of 1993 on the file of Principal Senior Civil Judge, Visakhapatnam (for short, 'the trial Court').

2. In the trial Court, Appellant/Appellant Appellant is the Plaintiff, who filed the suit in O.S.No.90 of 1993 seeking a declaration that the partnership of the Plaintiff and the Defendant in the name and style of Sri Seetha Mahalakshmi Shamiya Suppliers stood dissolved on 29.01.1993 and direct to refund of the capital contributed by the Plaintiff towards the business with interest amounting to Rs.27,589-26 ps., with future interest at the contract rate of 18% per annum with yearly rests and costs of the suit. The Respondent/Respondent is the Defendant in the said suit.

3. In the morning session, when the matter was called for hearing, no representation was made on behalf of the Appellant, despite the presence of learned counsel for the Respondent. In light of this 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: 21.08.2024 SAK THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE T. MALLIKARJUNA RAO

Date: 21.08.2024

SAK