K.Muniswamy Naidu Died Per Lrs A2 3 vs Collector., State Of Ap., Anr.
2024 Latest Caselaw 464 AP

Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati

K.Muniswamy Naidu Died Per Lrs A2 3 vs Collector., State Of Ap., Anr. on 11 January, 2024

      HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI

MAIN CASE No. A.S.No.3102 of 1999

                       PROCEEDING SHEET

Sl. DATE                                   ORDER                          OFFICE
No.                                                                        NOTE
13.   11-01-2024   VGKR,J
                                  I.A.Nos.1 and 2 of 2022

                           Heard Sri A.Chandraih Naidu, learned
                   counsel    for    the   petitioners   and   learned
                   Government Pleader for Appeals representing
                   on behalf of the respondents.

The undisputed facts are the petitioners are the plaintiffs in O.S.No.18 of 1995, on the file of Senior Civil Judge, Srikalahasti and the said suit was dismissed by the trial Judge. Aggrieved by the said decree and Judgment, the petitioners moved an appeal before this Court and numbered as A.S.3102 of 1999. It was brought to the notice of this Court that said appeal was dismissed for default on 04.04.2018. Learned counsel for the petitioners represented that in view of the situation of Covid, during the period of 2019 to 2021, the petitioners were residing at remote village and they were unable to know the result of the appeal. The apprehension of the petitioners/appellants is that they are residing at remote village and they are the agriculturists and they are not well acquainted with the legal

proceedings and on knowing the coercive steps going to be taken by the V.R.O, they learnt that the said appeal was dismissed for default. Admittedly, the petitioners have not moved these applications within a period of limitation and they moved an application with a delay of 1674 days, which is the abnormal delay.

Learned counsel for the petitioners fairly represented that he will ready to argue the matter soon after restoring the appeal and he will not take any adjournments.

2nd respondent/ The Tahsildar stated in the counter that there are no merits in the appeal filed by the appellants. It is not proper to discuss the merits or demerits in the main appeal, it will be discussed only in the main appeal itself.

Therefore, in view of the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the petitioners, I am of the considered view that one more opportunity has to be given to prosecute the main appeal.

Therefore, for the aforesaid reasons, these applications are allowed on a condition that the petitioners shall deposit a costs of Rs.2,000/- in the High Court Legal Services Authority.

Cont...

For complying the conditional order, list the matter on 22.01.2024.

_________ VGKR,J ANI