← Library
High Court for State of TelanganaAS/512/2009dismissed as infructuous

M/S. Bhagya Industries v. M/S. Trifed Head Office At New Delhi

2023-12-11G.Radha Rani3 pages

)

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA

AT HYDERABAD MONDAY,THE ELEVENTH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTYTHREE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE G.RADHA RANI APPEAL SUlT No: 512 OF 2009 Appeal Under Seclion 96 of C.P.C. against the Judgement and Decree dated 21.07.2Oo9 made in E.A.No.16 of 2008 in E.P.No.26 of 2005 in O.S.No. 64 of 2004 on the file of Learned District Judge, Khammam. Between:

M/s. Bhargava lndustries, Rep. by its Prop. Alapati Prasad, S/o. Guravaiah age 54 years, Rl/o. Yenekapadu Village, Vi.jayawada Rural Mandal, Krishna District.

...AppellanUClaim Petitioner AND

1. M/s. Trifed Head Office at New Delhi, Rep. by its Chairman, First Floor, Chenatha Bhavan, Nampally, Hyderabad.

DHr./Respondent

2. tv1is. Khammam Cold Storage Pvt. Ltd.,, Khammam. C/o. Khammam Cold Storage Complex Building, Venkatagiri Road, Near Grain lvlarket, Khammam Town and District.

JDr./Respondent Counsel for the Appellant: SRI M V HANUMANTHA RAO E\ Counsel for the Respondent No.1: MAHESH RAJ E The Court made the following: JUDGEMENT

/ THE HONOURABLE DT. JUSTICE G. RADHA RANI APPEAL SUIT No.512 of 2009 JUDGMENT:

This appeal is filed by the appellant - claim petitioner against the order dated21.07.2009 passed in E.A. No.l6 of 2008 in E.P. No.26 of 2005 in O.S. No.64 of 2004 by the learned District Judge, Khammam.

2. When the matter is taken up for hearing, leamed counsel for the appellant reported that the parlies had settled the matter out ofcourt and nothing survives lor adjudication in the appeal.

3. Recording the said submission, the appeal is dismissed as infructuous. No order as to costs.

Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. SD/.K. SHYLESHI DEPUTY REGISTRAR V //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER To,

1. The District Judge, Khammam

2. One CC to SRl. M V HANUMANTHA RAO Advocate [OPUC]

3. One CC to SRl. MAHESH RAJE Advocate [OPUC]

4. Two GD CoPies MY s

, I HIGH COURT DArED:& ,rztzo2s s o i4- ?

Jo 19 ilAR 2 r:' :, M4 i';

:,!

_n,/ ,,') ''. )r ':/ "t JUDGEMENT AS.No.SI2 of 2009 l l i I DrsMrssrNc THE APPEAL SUIT (A.S) I I AS !NFRUCTUOUS @'*i*K I i I i