Vidyavathi Giri v. A.P.State Financial Corporation

[ 3208 I HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD FRIDAY,THE TWENTY SECOND DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY THREE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SMT, JUSTICE P.SREE SUDHA APPEAL SUIT NO: 317 OF 2010 Appeal Suit filed under Section 96 of C.P.C. against the Judgment and decree dated 16.06.2009 made in O.S.No. 349 of 2005 on the file of the Court of the Vll Addl. Senior Civil Judge, Rangareddy District at L.B.Nagar, Hyderabad. Between:

Vidyavathi Giri, Wo. late Gopal Giri, Age: 80 years, R/o. 210, Gunrock Enclave Secunderabad-500 003 ..APPELLANT AND 1 . A.P.State Financial Corporation, rep.by its Chief General Manager Chirag AIi Lane, Hyderabad-02

2. CAPT GGK RAJU, S/o. Sudappa Raju, 175, Sector A, AWHO, Secunderabad-09 ..RESPONDENTS l.A. NO: 2OF 2O1O(ASMP. NO: 926 OF 2010) Petition under Order 39 Rules 1 & 2 of 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to pass an order of injunction restraining the respondents from alienating the suit Schedule property to any third party pending AS.No. 317 of 2010 preferred to the High Court against the order of the Court of the Vll Addl. Senior Civil Judge, Rangareddy District at L.B.Nagar, Hyderabad made in O.S.No. 349 of 2005 dated 16.06.2009 Counsel for the Appellant : Sri Kishore Rai Counsel for Respondent No.1 : Sri Srinivas Chitturu Counsel for Respondent No.2 : Sri Srinivas Polavarpu The Court delivered the following: JUDGMENT

THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE P. SREE SUDHA APPEAL SUIT NO. 317 F 2010 JUDGMENT:

Appellant/Plaintiff filed O.S.No.349 of 2005 on the file of VII Additional Senior Civil Judge, R.R.District at L.B.Nagar, Hyderabad I t for Specific Performance and Injunction and the same was dismissed, against which the plaintiff preferred the present Appeal Suit before this Court.

2.

Learned counsel for respondent No.2 filed a memo stating that the respondent No.2 died on 07.04.2072 and furnished the details of legal representatives of respondent No.2. Thereafter, they were not brought on the record, as such the appeal suit against legal representatives of respondent no.2 stands abated 3.

A perusal of the docket proceedings shows that the learned counsel for the appellant did not evince any interest to pursue the present appeal proceedings. On 31.08.2023, it was represented that Sri Apurva M.Ghokale intended to file vakalat for the appellant, but till date, no vakalat was filed on behalf of the appellant. Even today also, there is no representation for the appellant. It seems that the appellant is not interested to pursue the matter. No purpose would be served in continuing the Appeal Suit.

)'

,)\ 4.

Accordingly, the Appeal Suit is dismissed. No order as to costs.

Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed SD/. CH.VENKATESWARLU DEPU EGI R //TRUE COPY// \ I SECTION OFFICER To,

1. The Vll Addl. Senior Civil Judge, Rangareddy District at L.B.Nagar, Hvderabad. (with records)

2. Ohe CC to Sii. SRINIVAS POLAVARAPU, Advocate [oPUC] 3 One CC to Sri. SRINIVAS CHITTURU, Advocate [OPUC]

4. One CC to Sri. KISHORE RAl, Advocate [OPUC]

5. Two CD Copies Asr/nj b b

HIGH COURT DATED:2210912023 cg THE 5 t4

JUDGMENT

J _)Jt ef'

23 ilAr, nu ?,, n o-p,/,TaLlFO AS.No.317 of 2010 ;.

C) + * DISM]SSING THE AS WITHOUT COSTS \^ \r'