Mocherla Ramachandra Rao vs Gathula Krishna Murthy And Three Others
2024 Latest Caselaw 8418 AP

Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati

Mocherla Ramachandra Rao vs Gathula Krishna Murthy And Three Others on 12 September, 2024

 APHC010377312002
                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
                                    AT AMARAVATI                               [3369]
                             (Special Original Jurisdiction)

              THURSDAY, THE TWELFTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER
                  TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR

                                     PRESENT

         THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE T MALLIKARJUNA RAO

                         SECOND APPEAL NO: 1070/2002

Between:

Mocherla Ramachandra Rao, Suryaraopeta, Kakinada                     ...APPELLANT

                                        AND

Gathula Krishna Murthy and three others                            ...RESPONDENT

Counsel for the Appellant:

1. B SOBHANA RAO NAIDU

Counsel for the Respondent:

1. E V V S RAVI KUMAR

The Court made the following JUDGMENT:

1. This Second Appeal has been filed by the Appellant/First Appellant/First Respondent/ Plaintiff against the Decree and Judgment dated 09.10.2002,, in A.S.No.8 A. of 1995 on the file of VII Additional District Judge, Kakinada (for short, 'the 1st Appellate Court') reversing the decree and Judgment dated 03.03.1992, 03.03.1992 in O.S.No.582 of 1985 on the file of I Additional District Munsif, Kakinada (for short, 'the trial Court').

2. In the trial Court, the appellant herein who is the plaintiff, laintiff, filed the suit in O.S.No.582 of 1985 for specific performance of the registered Sale Agreement dt. 07.08.1981.

3. When the matter is taken up for hearing, there is no representation on behalf of the appellant.

4. Despite listing the matter under the caption "For Dismissal", learned counsel for the respondents is present. It seems that the appellant has not evinced any interest in pursuing the appeal.

5. In the result, this Second Appeal is dismissed for default. However, there shall be no order as to costs.

6. Interlocutory applications pending, if any, in the appeal, shall also stand closed.

_______________________ T.MALLIKARJUNA RAO, J MVA 12.09.2024