Chimmirala Anil Kumar vs Talluri Seetharavamma Anr
2024 Latest Caselaw 4716 AP

Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati

Chimmirala Anil Kumar vs Talluri Seetharavamma Anr on 24 June, 2024

APHC010441082010
                   IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
                                 AT AMARAVATI                    [3460]
                          (Special Original Jurisdiction)

            MONDAY, THE TWENTY FOURTH DAY OF JUNE
               TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR

                              PRESENT

          THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY

             CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL NO: 925/2010

Between:

Chimmirala Anil Kumar                                   ...APPELLANT

                                 AND

Talluri Seetharavamma Anr and Others               ...RESPONDENT(S)

Counsel for the Appellant:

     1. V DYUMANI

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

     1. SREENIVASA RAO VELIVELA

The Court made the following:

JUDGMENT:

1. The present C.M.A is filed against the interlocutory order dated 27.07.2010 in I.A.No.100 of 2010 in A.S.No.99 of 2007 passed by the Family Judge-cum-Additional District & Sessions Judge, Guntur.

2. The appellant is the defendant. The suit was filed against the appellant/defendant for declaration of title and recovery of possession. The said suit was decreed on 14.08.2006 by the Principal Senior Civil Judge, Guntur. Questioning the Judgment and Decree, the appellant filed A.S.No.99 of 2007. Subsequently, the appeal suit was dismissed for non- prosecution on 26.03.2009. The appellant then filed I.A.No.100 of 2010 for condoning the delay of 248 days in seeking to set aside the default order passed by the Appellate Court. On contest, the said application was dismissed. Hence, the C.M.A is filed.

3. Heard Smt.Y.Dyumani, learned counsel for the appellant and Sri Srinivasa Rao Velivela, learned counsel for the respondents.

4. The learned counsel for the appellant would contend that she has no contact with the appellant and also stated that the decree was executed.

5. Recording the submission of the learned counsel for the appellant and the fact that the decree was executed, the C.M.A is dismissed for non-prosecution.

There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, pending applications, if any, shall stand closed.

__________________ NYAPATHY VIJAY, J

Date: 24.06.2024

IS THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY

CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL NO: 925/2010

Date: 24.06.2024

IS