S. Saroja vs Sri Lakshmi Kilaru Another
2022 Latest Caselaw 5173 Tel

       THE HON'BLE Dr. JUSTICE SHAMEEM AKTHER
                         AND
     THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE NAGESH BHEEMAPAKA

      CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL No.174 of 2006

JUDGMENT:       (Per Hon'ble Dr. Justice Shameem Akther)




      No representation for both sides. Perused the record.


2.    This appeal, under Order 43 Rule 1 of CPC, is filed by the

appellant/respondent          No.1,      challenging       the   order,   dated

21.10.2005, passed in I.A.No.328 of 2003 in O.S.No.468 of

1999 by the learned XIV Additional Chief Judge, City Civil

Courts, Hyderabad, whereby the subject I.A. filed by the

appellant seeking review of the judgment and decree dated

30.06.2003 passed in the subject O.S.No.468 of 1999, was

partly allowed.

3. Para 11 of the impugned order, dated 21.10.2005, reads

as follows:

"Hence, the petition is allowed in part to the extent of the fifth defendant and the judgment and decree dated 30.06.2003 is set aside against the fifth defendant without costs. The petition of the first petitioner, the defendant No.3 is dismissed without costs."

4. As seen from the material placed on record, neither

there is patent error nor any other circumstances to

interfere with the order under challenge. Therefore, the

appeal is devoid of merit and is liable to be dismissed.

5. Accordingly, the Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is dismissed.

Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed.

There shall be no order as to costs.

______________________ Dr. SHAMEEM AKTHER, J

_______________________ NAGESH BHEEMAPAKA, J Date: 18.10.2022 ssp