Baddam Chalma Reddy , Chalmi Reddy v. K.Laxmi Rajam And ANR
This judgment came from a scanned document and its text layer is unreliable — words may be garbled. Check the original PDF before relying on any passage.
i t3217l
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA
AT HYDERABAD TUESDAY, THE THIRTY FIRST DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE N.TUKARAMJI lA.Nos.1, 2 and 3 oI 2023 INiANO M.A.C.M.A.No: 2973 OF 2007 Appeal filed under Section 171 of Motor Vehicles Act against the Judgment dated 18-05-2007 passed in O.P.No.20B2 of 2004 on the file of the Court of the XV Additional Chief Judge-cum-l Additional Metropolitan Sessions Judge, Hyderabad. Between:
Baddam Chalma Reddy @ Chalmi Reddy, S/o.Sri Ram Reddy, Hindu, aged 27 years, Occ: Operator in UMA Swastik Plast [P] Ltd R/o.H.No.4-39, Subhashnagar Colony, Kammaguda Village, Hayathnagar Mandal, Ranga Reddy District, presently residing at H.No.16-2-740/7, Musarambagh, Hyderabad. ...AppellanUPetitioner AND
1. K.Laxmi Rajam, S/o.K.Devaiah, Aged Major, Occ: Owner of Car Bearing No.AP 28J 7723 Rio.H.No.93 LIGH, Santhoshnagar, Hyderabad - 36.
2. M/s.National lnsurance Company Limited, rep. by its Branch Manager O/o. D.No. 1 2/1 3/1 6/1 3, Vamshi Complex, Tarnaka, Secunderabad. R2 dismissed for default vide Court Order dated 11-7-2016. . Respondents/Respondents l lA NO: 1 OF 2023 Petition under Section 5 of Limitation Act praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to condone the delay of 1638 days in filing the petition to set aside the order of dismissal dated. 1 1-07 -2016.
lA NO: 2 OF 2023 Petition under Order 9 Rule I of CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to set aside the order of dismissal dl.11tO712016 against the 2nd respondent in M.A.C.M.A.SR. No.29322120'1 1.
lA NO: 3 OF 2023 Petition under Order 5 Rule 20 R/w 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 permit the petitioner/appellant to serve notice on the 2nd respondent.
!
Counsel for the Appellant: Ms. G. Sindhu (Not Present) Counsel for the Respondent No.1: Ms. K. Uma Devi Counsel for the Respondent No.2: None Appeared The Court delivered the following: COMMON JUDGMENT
THE HONOURABLE SRIJUSTICE N. TUKARAMJI lA Nos.1. 2 and 3 of 2023 IN/AND MOTOR ACCIDENT CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL No.2973 OF 2007 COMMON JUDGMENT:
1.
This tvlotor Accident Civil lt/iscellaneous Appeal has been preferred by the appellanVclaim petitioner challenging the decree and award dated 18.05.2007 in O.P No.20B2 of 2OO4 passed by the Chairman, [t/otor Accident Claims Tribunal -cum- | Additional Metropolitan Sessions Judge -cum- XV Additional Chief Judge, Hyderabad.
2.
l.A.No.1 of 2023 is filed by the petitioner/appellant seeking to condone the delay of 1638 days in filing the petition to set-aside the order of dismissal dated 11.07.2016 against the respondent No.2/lnsurer.
3.
l.A.No.2 of 2023 is filed by the petitioner/appellant seeking to ) set-aside the order of dismissal dated 11.07.2016 against the respondent No.2/insurer 4.
l.A.No.3 of 2023 is filed by the petitioner/appellant seeking to serve notice on the respondent No.2iinsurer.
5.
No representation for the petitioner/appellant.
6.
These lnte:rlocutory Applications were filed with a delay of 1638 days to set-asidt> the order of dismissal dated 1 1.07.2016;lgainst the respondent No.j2llnsurer. ln spite of listing the matter under the caption 'for dismissal', none has appeared for the petitioner/appellant. 7.
[t/s.K.Ume Devi, learned counsel for the respondent No.1 is present.
8.
Having regard to the fact that the petitioner/appellant is not evincing interest in prosecuting these petitions and also the appeal, this Court is left with no other option but to dismiss the petitions and the Appeal for want of prosecution. Accordingly, l.A.Nos.1, 2 and 3 of 2023 and the a1>peal are dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs.
Miscellane.ous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. SD/-A,SREENIVASA REDDY S TA NT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// E ]TION OFFICER I To, The XV Additicna Hyderabad (w th One CC to Ms. G One CC to Ms. K.
Two CD Copie:;
I Chief Judge-cum-l Additional Metropolitan Sessions Judge, records, if any) . Sindhu, Advocate topUCl Uma Devi, Advocate tOpUCl .lW J 4.
Kam/PSL \
HIGH COURT DATED:31 112t2024 --__:_::::- _: _".- ' Q^i'\'
+ ^ Jo (j 2U5 2 4 t[,7 COMMON JU ]GMENT lA.Nos.l ,2 ancl3 of 2023 IN/AND MACMA.No,2973 of 2007 \.
// .// n .. -r!f DrDISMISSING THE l.As AND THE MAI3MA @ L0 lw-