Chava Ayyanna Raju vs Kurukuri Veera Raju
2024 Latest Caselaw 8295 AP

Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati

Chava Ayyanna Raju vs Kurukuri Veera Raju on 11 September, 2024

 APHC010200112004
                    IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
                                  AT AMARAVATI                          [3369]
                           (Special Original Jurisdiction)

             WEDNESDAY, THE ELEVENTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER
                 TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR

                                   PRESENT

         THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE T MALLIKARJUNA RAO

                      SECOND APPEAL NO: 1313/2004

Between:

Chava Ayyanna Raju                                                ...APPELLANT

                                      AND

Kurukuri Veera Raju and Others                               ...RESPONDENT(S)

Counsel for the Appellant:

1. GULLAPALLI RADHAKRISHNAN

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

1. T V S PRABHAKARA RAO

The Court made the following JUDGMENT:

1. This Second Appeal has been filed by the Appellant/Appellant/ 2nd Appellant/Appellant/ Defendant against the Decree and Judgment dated 16.07.2004,, in A. A.S.No.170 of 1999 on the file of V Additional District Judge (Fast Track Court) Court), East Godavari, Rajahmundry,, (for short, 'the 1st Appellate Court') confirming the decree and Judgment dated 15.09.1999, in O.S.No.206 of 1993 3 (common judgment in O.S.No.206 of 1993 and 207 of 1993) on the file of I Additional Junior Civil Judge, Rajahmundry (for short, 'the trial Court').

2. In the trial Court, 1st Respondent/1st Respondent is the Plaintiff, who filed the suit in O.S.No.206 206 of 1993 for recovery of Rs.6,234.33 6,234.33 ps ps., based on the foot of the promissory note. 2nd Respondent/2nd Respondent is the 1st 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 1st 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: 11.09.2024 SAK THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE T. MALLIKARJUNA RAO

Date: 11.09.2024

SAK