Sriram Chandran Kumar v. Yerram Shoba Rani
[ 32s8 ]
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA
AT HYDERABAD MONDAY, THE TWENTY EIGHTH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY THREE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SAMBASIVARAO NAIDU SECOND APPEAL NO: 1427 OF 2018 Appeal under section 100 r/w Order 42 Rule 1 of C.P.C aggrieved by the judgment and decree dated 22-6-2018 in A.S.No. 112 ot 2016 on the file of Vl Additional District Judge, Mahbubabad preferred by the judgment and decree dated 31-08-2016 in O.S.No. 76 of 2009 on the file of the Senior Civil Judge, Mahabubabad.
Between:
Sriram Chandran Kumar, S/o Nageshwar Rao, aged about 39 years, Occup: Business, RJo Kesamudrarn Village,and Mandal Mahabubabad District. ...APPE LLANT/Def. No. 1 AND
1. Yerram Shoba Rani, Wo Srinivas, aged about 36 years Occup: Housewife Rl/o Huzurabad village and Mandal Karimnagar District ...RESPONDENTS/PLAINTIFF
2. Sriram Meera Bai W/o Nageshwar Rao (Died) ...RESPONDENT/D.No.2 lA NO: 1 OF 2018 Petition under Section 15'1 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to stay the execution of the judgment and decree dated 22-06-2018 in A.S.No.'1 12 ot 2016 on the file of the Vl Addl. Dist Judge Mahabubabad confirming the judgment and decree in OS.no.76 of 2009 passed by the Sr. Civil Judge at Mahabubabad Counsel for the Appellant: SRl. BANKATLAL MANDHANI (NOT PRESENT) Counsel for the Respondents: SRl. M. RAMA RAO The Gourt made the following: JUDGMENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SAMBASTVA RAO NAIDU SECOND APPEAL No.1427 0F 2018 JUDGMENT:
None appeared for the appellant, though the matter was listed today under the caption 'for dismissal'' On the face of the proceeding sheet, on 22.06.2023 learned counsel for appellant hasinformedthisCourtthatthematterhasbeenadjusted between the parties. Since then there was no representation for the appellant and that today this Court is informed by learned counsel for the respondents that the matter has been adjusted i between the parties, thereby, the appellant did nqt turn up' Thus' I it appears that the appellant is not interested to prosecute the i I I matter vigilantly and diligently anymore. Therefore, this appeal is I I Ii liable to be dismissed for non-prosecution'
i 2.
Accordingly, this appeal is dismissed for nonI prosecution.
.
Pending miscellaneous application, if any, shall stand closed.
Sd/. K. SRINIVASA RAO JorNrwsrRAR //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER To, The Vl Additional District Judge, Mahbubabad The Senior Civil Judge, Mahabubabad.
One CC to SRl. BANKATLAL MANDHANI, Advocate [OPUC] One CC to SRl. tvl. RAMA RAO, Advocate IOPUCI Two CD Copies .I'YH/VH .\P
HIGH COURT DATED: 2810812023 'i t li:L "__-_:;-:---' i-'
JUDGMENT
SA.No.1427 ot 2018 l I i I l I I I DISMISSING THE SECOND APPEAL FOR NON-PROSECUTION