V Subba Rao v. Y Venkatamurali Krishna
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 FRIDAY, THE THIRTY FIRST DAY OF DECEIVBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY ONE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE A.VENKATESHWARA REDDY ctvlL REVISION PETITION NO: 1904 OF 2014 Petition under Article 227 of lhe Constitution of lndia aggrieved by the order daled 13.12.2013 made in lA No.435 of 2012 in OS.No.41'1 of 2006 on the file of the Court of the I Additional District Judge, R. R. District. Between:
'l . V Subba Rao, S/o Seshagiri Rao, aged about 43 years, Occ: Business Fyo Flat No.'10'1, Kamalapriyanka Residency Kamalanagari Colony, Krishnanagar, Hyderabad
2. D Keshav Chowdary, S/o Sri Ranga Rao, aged 42 yeais, Occ: Business Fl/o Flat No.504, Seetharama Enclave Nizampet Raod, Kukatpally Houslng Board, Hyderabad .,.PETITIONERS AND
1. Y Venkatamurali Krishna, Sio Late Seetharamaiah, aged 48 years, Occ: Business R/o Flat No.502, Seetharama Enclave Nizampet Road, Kukatpally, Correct address R/o Flat No: 102, Sri Sai Nilayam H.No.8-3-169/32, Opp Siddarthanagar Community Centre, Siddarthanagar, SR Nagar, Hyderabad
2. Seetharama Housing Pvt. ltd., Office at 405, Taj Enclave, 4th Floor, Lakdikapul Hyderabad rep by its IVD
3. Sri V Ratnakar, S/o Late Subba Rao, aged major, Office at 405, Taj Enclave, 4th Floor, Lakdikapul, Hyderabad
4. G l\,4allikarjuna Rao, S/o Venkateswar Rao, aged 62 years, Office at 40S, Raj Enclave, 4th Floor, Lakdikapul, Hyderabad.
...RESPONDENTS cRPMP. NO: 2679 OF 2014 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to grant stay of all further proceedings in OS.No.411 of 2006 pursuant to the orders dt. 1311212013 in lA.No.435 of 2012 in OS.No.411 of 2006 pending on the fite of lAdditional District Judge, Ranga Reddy District.
Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI CH. SRINIVAS Counsel for the Respondents: SRI K. PAVAN KUMAR The Court made the following: ORDER
THE HON'BLE SRIJUSTICE A. VENKATESHWARA REDDY C-RL No.l904 of2014 ORDER:
The learned counsel for the revision petitioners called absent. There is no representation on his behalf.
The leamed counsel for the respondents submits that pursuant to the orders in IA No.435 of 2012 in OS No.4ll of 2006 dated 13.12.2013, the defendants have filed their written statement and in view of the stay orders granted by this Court, there was no funher progress of the matter.
In such circumstances, the presence or representation on behalf of the revision petitioners is felt essential, but there is no representation from the revision petitioners. Therefore, I flnd no merit to continue the matter.
Hence, the Civil Revision petition is disrnissecl for nonprosecution. Miscellaneous applications, if any pending in this revision petition shall stand closed.
SD/-N.CHANDRA SEKHAR RAO ASSISTANT REGISTRAR /','
.-lt"
!
\ //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER To,
1. The I Additional District Judge, R.R. District.
2. One CC to Sri Ch. Srinivas, Advocate [OPUC]
3. One CC to Sri K. Pavan Kumar, Advocate [OPUC]
4. Two CD Copies
5. One Spare Copy gbr
HIGH COURT DATED: 31|,1212021 i+Z $ t ATg \ J:l t r.) 25 JAN 2022 i (:r'
ORDER
CRP.No.1904 of 2014 DISMISSING THE CRP FOR NON PROSECUTION q 2,D>)-