Smt.Prema v. N.Gopinath Rao
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.
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 HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE P.SREE SUDHA CITY CIVIL COURT APPEAL NOi 260 0F 2002 Appeal Under Section 19 of Family Court Act 1984 aggrieved by the Judgment and decree dated 15-12-2001 in O.S.No. 121 of 1997 on the file of the Court of the Family Court Judge, City Civil Court, at Hyderabad Between:
Smt. Prema Wo. N. Gopinath Rao aged about 50 years, Occ: Housewife, R/o. (Temp) 3-4-196, Lingampally, Hyderabad.
... Plaintiff / APPELLANT AND N. Gopinath Razo S/o. Not known to Petitioner, aged d3 years, Occ: Retd. Employee _ of ECIL, R.o. 12-1-508/39, Laxminagir Colony, Shantinagar, Lalaguda, Secudnerabad . DefendanURespondentCounsel for the Appellant: SRl. SRINIVAS CHOWDARY (Died) Counsel for the Respondent: SRI R. UMENDER KUMAR The Court detivered the following Judgment:
THE H'3N'BLE SMT. JUSTICE P.SREE SUDHA C.C.C.A.No.260 of 2OO2 JUDGMENT:
This appeal is hled against the judgment anC decree dated 15.12.2001 in O.S.No.121 of 1997 passed by the learned F'amily Court Judge, Ci[, Civil Court, at Hyderabad.
2.
The sr,ut vide O.S.No.121 of 1997 u/as filed lor maintcnance b1, the rvife against her husband for clissolution of marriage, recovcry of articles and for maintenance. Thc trial Court only granted permanent of Rs.75,OCrO/- towzrrds permanent atimony and other three reliefs wr:re disntissed against which plaintiff in the suit preferred this apceal. 3.
Learnec counsel for respondent present.
4.
It Ls ir lormed that Iearned counsel for he appellant passed away on 08.12.2023 and the same was recordcd on 28.t1 .2024.
5.
As the irppcllant failed to take nccessary st()ps to pursue the litigation cven after listing the matter under ttrr: caption lor dismissal, no purpose is served in continuing the acpeal. 6.
Accordirrgly C.C.C.A is dismissed for non-prosecution. t As a secucl, miscellaneous petitions, pending il any, shall sta nd t loscrl.
NIVASA RAO REGISTRAR Sd,- K. SRI JOINT rl\lLV SECT //TRUE COPY// ION OFFICER i,l*tSr'5i,r'lhi-:uis3fl"ti'Jl?l'it.tJJ:lt3l3J.je"*"nrecords)
3. One CC to SRl. R' UMENDER KUMAR' Advocate TOPUCI Two CD CoPitts YX I ) krrl/gh
HIGH COURT DATED:3111212024 E ST^I€ a) z (] nr il'\i\ ?[25 Ct ta JUDGMT]N'I .'.,,,\1 or.r,..
\\\--..
CCCA.No.260 of 20O1t DISMISSINCi I.HL CC( '\ ITOIL NON PROSIICIUTION G ..e(f,(A W*