Shaik Mahaboob Basha vs The District Collector, Cuddapah
2024 Latest Caselaw 9756 AP

Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati

Shaik Mahaboob Basha vs The District Collector, Cuddapah on 29 October, 2024

                                            1

 APHC010116132006
                       IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
                                     AT AMARAVATI                              [3369]
                              (Special Original Jurisdiction)

               TUESDAY, THE TWENTY NINETH DAY OF OCTOBER
                    TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR

                                       PRESENT

           THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE T MALLIKARJUNA RAO

                          SECOND APPEAL NO: 1318/2006

Between:

Shaik Mahaboob Basha                                                  ...APPELLANT

                                          AND

The District Collector Cuddapah and Others                       ...RESPONDENT(S)

Counsel for the Appellant:

1. D RAGHAVA REDDY

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

1.

The Court made the following JUDGMENT:

1. This Second Appeal has been filed by the Appellant/ Appellant/Respondent Respondent/ Plaintiff against the Decree and Judgment dated 01.09.2006,, in A.S.No.62 A.S.No. of a, (for short, 'the 1st 2005 on the file of Principal District Judge, Kadapa, Appellate Court') reversing the decree and Judgment dated 08.02.2005, 08.02.2005 in O.S.No.286 of 2001 on the file of III Additional Junior Civil Judge,, Kada Kadapa (for short, 'the trial Court').

2. In the trial Court, Appellant/ Appellant/Respondent is the Plaintiff, who filed the suit in O.S.No.286 of 2001, for recovery of Rs.84,400/ Rs.84,400/-with with future interest from the date of filing the suit till its realization.

realization Respondents/Appellants 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: 29.10.2024 SAK

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE T. MALLIKARJUNA RAO

Date: 29.10.2024

SAK