G. Bagi Reddy v. V. Balamani

\ \ [ 3253 ] HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD THURSDAY, THE TWENTY THIRD DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTYTHREE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE M.G.PRIYADARSINI APPEAL SUIT NO: 2654OF 2OO4 Appeal Under Section 96 of C.P.C., against the Judgement and decree dated 14-12-1998 made in O.S.No.181 of 1987 on the file of the Court of the Fourth Senior Civil Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad.

Between:

G. Bagi Reddy, S/o. Late Ranga Reddy, aged 54 years, Occ : Agriculture, Ryo.H.No. 1 -1 -287 l1 1 I 1 4, Chikkadapally, Hyderabad. D. Bafwanth Reddy, S/o. Late Rangareddy, aged 47 years, Occ : Employee in Charminar Company, Ri/o.H.No.1-1-287 I 11114, Chikkadapally, Hyderabad. ...APPELLANTS/DEFENDANT AND

1. V. Balamani, Dio. Lingareddy & Wife of Narayana Reddy, aged 50 years, Occ: Household , P./o. 22-72, Neredmet, Tahsil Malkajgiri, Ranga Reddy District.

....RESPON DENT/PLAINTIFF

2. G.Chandramma, Wo. Late Rangareddy, PJo. 1-1-287111/14, Chikkadpally, Hyderabad.

3. G. Jangamma, Wo. Pentaiah, Ryo. Malkajgiri, Hyderabad.

4. Parvatamma, Wo. Narasimha Reddy, Rl/o. Mailaram, T. Bhongeer.

5. D.Laxmi W Laxamamma, W/o.D.Linga Reddy, aged 54 years, Occ : House Wife, R/o. H. No. 1 -1 -287 135, Chikkadpally, Hyderabad. (2 lo 4 aie not necessary parties to this appeal) (Respondent No.S impleaded as party Respondent vide Court Order dated 28-7 -2004 in CMP. No.7553/04) ......DEFENDANTS 3 to 5 in SUIT

ASMP.NO.11909 0F 2004) Petition Under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to stay the passing of the final decree in O.S.No.181 of 1987 on the file of the Hon'ble lV Senior Civil Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad. Counsel for the Appellants : SRI.Y.ASHOK RAJ (NOT PRESENT) Counsel for the Respondent No.5 : SRI.POTTIGARI SRIDHAR REDDY Counsel for the Respondent No.1 : SRI.V.TULASI REDDY The Court made the following Judgment : -

THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE M,G.PRIYADARSINI APPEAL SUIT No.2654 of2OO4

JUDGMENT

Since there was no representation on behalf of appellants on the earlier occasion, the matter, which pertains to 2004, was directed to be listed today under the caption ,For Dismissal,. trven today, there is no representation on behalf of appellants. It is presumed that the appellants are not interested to proceed with the appeal. Hence, the Appeal Suit stands dismissed for non_prosecution. No order as to costs Miscellaneous applications, if any, pending shall stand dismissed.

Sd/-M.MANJULA DEPUTY REG|srThAR a SECTION OFFICER To //TRUE COPY//

1. The lV Senior Civil Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad. (With Records).

2. One CC to SRI.Y.ASHOK RAJ, Advocate [OPUC]

3. One CC to SRI.POTTIGARI SRIDHAR REDDY, Advocate [OPUCI

4. One CC to SRI.V.TULASI REDDY, Advocate [OPUC]

5. Two CD Copies SA

I , / t HIGH COURT DATED:2310312023

JUDGMENT

AS.No.2654 ot 2004 o oR 1H st4 ( s\ (\ o 23JUil20A '

,L;

'i, r.

,+ .!- .

1....1,.--,.'''., - \:-i :._ - -_; _-- DISMISSING THE APPEAL SUIT FOR NON _ PROSECUTION WITHOUT COSTS.

ol @w, .\*