Nama Vani v. Chirragani Venkateshwarlu

HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD FRIDAY, THE FIFTEENTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY THREE PRESENT THE HON'BLE SMT JUSTICE P.SREE SUDHA AS NO: 10 OF 2010 Appeal Under Section 96 of C.P.C against the Judgment and Decree Dated 2010812009 made in O.S. No.SB o'f 2OO4 on the file of the Court of the Senior Civil Judge, Khammam.

Between:

Nama Vani, W/o. Prabhakar, Housewife, Fl/o. Papaigudem Village, Tirumalayapalem Mandal, Khammam District.

...APPELLANT/PLAINTIFF AND

1. Chirragani Venkateshwarlu, S/o. Yakaiah, Occ: Business, Rl/o. Komatipally Village, K.Samudram Mandal, Warangal District.

2. Shaik Budem Beig, S/o. Uddandu Saheb, Occ: Business, Rl/o. H.No.l 1-1 1120/8, NSP Camp, Khammam.

3. Pannala Krishna Murthy, S/o. Vijayarama Sastry, Occ: Associate Professor, Rl/o. H.No. 4-6lC, Near Bommajagaiah Rice Mill, Dhamsalapuram, Mustafa Nagar, Bonakal Road Khammam.

...RESPONDENTS/DEFENDANTS ASMP. NO: 22OF 2O1O 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 direct the respondents 1 to 3 to alienate or create any third party interest on the property bearing No. 10-3-234 with vacant site measuring 224 sq.yards bounded by East: house of the Budigam Mattaiah, West: Municipal Raod, North: House of A.Veerabhadram, South: Government Primary School, situated at Mamidlagudem, Khammam Town, Khammam District. Counsel for the Appellant: SRl. V. RAGHU (NOT PRESENT) Counsel forthe Respondents: NON APPEARED The Court made the following: JUDGMENT

THE HONOURABLE SMT ]USTTCE P. SREE SUDHA APPEAL SUIT NO, 10 OF 2O1O JUDGMENT:

Appellant/Plaintiff filed O.S.No.5B of 2004 on the file of Senior Civil Judge, Khammam for recovery of money and the same was dismissed, against which plaintiff therein preferred the present Appeal Suit before this Court.

2.

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 19.08.2023 there was no representation on behalf of the learned counsel for the appellant and the matter was directed to be listed under the caption 'for dismissal'. Even today also, there is no representation for the appellant. No purpose would be served in continuing the Appeal Suit.

3.

Accordingly, the Appeal Suit is dismissed for non-prosecution. No order as to costs.

Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed. SD/. M. RI,MANA KRISHNA DEPJTY REGISTRAR tr,t'

\ //TRUE COPY// SE:CTION OFFICER To,

1. The Senior Civil Judge, Khammam (With Records)

2. One CC to Sri. V RAGHU, Advocate tOpUCl.

3. Two CD Copies $.- I

t HIGH COURT DATED: 1510912023 ,e STATE O 7z 3r U s [tt 1t8 t

JUDGMENT

I s i DV AS.No.10 of 2O10 DISMISSING THE AS NON PROSECUTION WITHOUT COSTS 6*r"

\> \.