Kurakula Ranganayakulu vs Sangam Govinda Rao
2024 Latest Caselaw 9759 AP

Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati

Kurakula Ranganayakulu vs Sangam Govinda Rao on 29 October, 2024

                                         1

 APHC010014412006
                    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: 1187/2006

Between:

Kurakula Ranganayakulu                                             ...APPELLANT

                                       AND

Sangam Govinda Rao                                               ...RESPONDENT

Counsel for the Appellant:

1. N V ANANTHA KRISHNA

Counsel for the Respondent:

1. G RAMA GOPAL

The Court made the following JUDGMENT:

1. This Second Appeal has been filed by the Appellant / Respondent / Defendant against the Decree and Judgment dated 29.08.2006,, in A. A.S.No.78 of 2001 on the file of District Judge,, Vizianagaram (for short, 'the 1st Appellate Court') reversing the decree and Judgment dated 04.04.2001, in O.S.No.59 O.S of 1999 on the file of Junior Civil Judge, Kothavalasa (for short, 'the trial Court').

Court')

2. In the trial Court, Respondent / Appellant is the Plaintiff, who filed the suit in O.S.No.59 of 1999 for recovery of Rs.46,000/-,, based on the foot of the promissory note. Appellant / Respondent is the Defendant in the said suit 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: 29.10.2024 SAK

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE T. MALLIKARJUNA RAO

Date: 29.10.2024

SAK