P.V.Shyamsunder v. K.Ramesh And Another

13217 |

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA

AT HYDERABAD WEDNESDAY, THE FIFTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.TUKARAMJI CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO: 1648 OF 2009 Petition under Section 22 of AP Buildings (Leease, Rent and Eviction) Control Act, 1960 against the order dated O2lO7l2O07 passed in EA.No. 48 of 2001 in Ep.No. 13 of 2001 in RC.No. 479 of 2000 on the file of the Court of the tV Additional Rent Controller, Hyderabad.

Between:

P.V Shyamsunder , S/o P.Vithal Rao, Hindu, aged about 58 years, Business, No. 1-1012101E, Ashok Nagar X Road, Hyderabad_ Occ ...PETITIONER/PETITIONER AND K. Ramesh S/o. K. Pandurangam, Hindu, aged about 50 years, Occ: Tailor Rlo. 1-2-21312 Domalguda Hyderabad (A.P) M.N.Kishore Kumar, Hindu, Aged about 46 years, Occ. Nil, Cto. P.V.Shyamsunder, R:/o. 1-10-210/E Ashok Nagar X Rbad, Hyderabad. ...RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT l.A. NO: I OF 2009(CRPMP. NO:2357 0F 2009) 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 stay all further proceedings in pursuance to the orders passed in EP.No. '13 of 2001 in RC.No. 479 o't 2OOO dt.0210712007 on the file of the tV Additionat Rent Controller, Hyderabad pending disposal of the revision Counsel for the Petitioner: Sri R A Achuthanand (Not Present) Counsel for the Respondent No. 'l: K Goverdhan Reddy (Not Present) Counsel for the Respondent No. 2:

The Court delivered the following JUDGMENT:

, z.{ THE HONOURABLE SR!JUSTICE N. TUKARAMJT C.R.P. No.1648 OF 2009 JUDGMENT:

This revision has been filed challenging lhe order dated 02.07.2007 in E.A.No.48 of 2001 in E.p.No.'t3 of 2OOi in R.C.No.479 of 2000 passed by the lV Additional Rent Controller, Hyderabad.

2.

On the last date of adjournment, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner had informed that he had no instructions, therefore, the matter was directed to be listed today under the caption ,for dismissal'.

3.

Today, when the matter is taken up for hearing, none appears for the parties. Having left with no other option, this appeal is dismissed for non-prosecution. No costs.

As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions if any, stands closed. Sd/- A.SREENIVASA REDDY ASSISTANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// ^ .r l\.w"

SECTION OFFICER To,

1. The lV Additional Rent Controller, Hyderabad. (with records;, if any)

2. One CC to Sri R. A. Achuthanand Advocate [OPUC]

3. One CC to Sri K. Goverdhan Reddy, Advocate [OPUC]

4. Two CD Copies vl{ \

HIGH COURT DATED: 05t0212025

ORDER

f l{ T [4 s .-1l 46CRP.No.1648 of 2009 (f .19 JUll t t TCHro S"l'.'D,f DISMISSING THE APPEAL FOR NON-PROSECUTION b