Allowed

Kommula Sumathi Devi v. Chelluboina Bulisatyam

Andhra Pradesh HC10 Dec 2021CRP/773/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This court allowed a civil revision petition permitting the petitioner to serve notice of C.M.A.No.6 of 2019 on the learned counsel appearing for the 2nd respondent in the trial court, acknowledging the respondent's unavailability in India.

What did the court decide?

Permission granted to serve notice of C.M.A.No.6 of 2019 on the counsel appearing for the 2nd respondent in the trial court.

Kommula Sumathi Devi Vs Chelluboina… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Andhra Pradesh HC (2021)

¶1

HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R. RAGHUNANDAN RAO

¶2

C.R.P.No.773 of 2020

¶3

ORDER:

¶4

Heard Sri Ravi Chimalapati, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Sri S. Subba Reddy, learned counsel appearing for the 1^st respondent.

¶5

The petitioner had filed O.S.No.98 of 2018 on the file of the Junior Civil Judge-cum-Judicial magistrate of First Class, Razole, against various defendants including the 2^nd respondent herein. The petitioner had also filed I.A.No.476 of 2018 for an injunction against the defendants in the suit and the same was dismissed by the trial Court on 18.09.2019.

¶6

Aggrieved by the said order, the petitioner approached the Senior Civil Judge, Razole by way of C.M.A.No.6 of 2019 and sought an injunction restraining the defendants in the suit. In the course of serving notice of the said C.M.A., the petitioner expressed inability to serve notice on the 2^nd respondent at the address given in the cause title on the ground that the 2^nd respondent was not available in India. The petitioner had thereupon filed I.A.No.10 of 2019 for permission for serving notice of the appeal on the counsel appearing for the 2^nd respondent in the trial Court. This application was dismissed by way of a docket order dated 20.02.2020 holding that since the appeal is a separate proceeding, it would not be appropriate to direct notice on the counsel appearing for the 2^nd respondent in the trial Court. Aggrieved by the said order, the present revision petition has been filed.

¶7

It appears that when the matter had initially come up before this Court, the petitioner was directed to serve notice on the respondents. The petitioner had filed a memo dated 18.03.2021 vide U.S.R.No.20215 of

¶8

RRR,J 2 C.R.P.No.773 of 2020

¶9

2021 including proof of service on the 2^nd respondent by way of track consignment note of the postal department. Despite service of notice, there is no representation for the 2^nd respondent.

¶10

In view of the difficulties expressed by the petitioner, it may not be appropriate for the appellate Court in not permitting the petitioner to serve notice on the 2^nd respondent through his counsel appearing for the 2^nd respondent in the trial Court.

¶11

In view of the fact that the notice of this revision petition had been served on the 2^nd respondent, despite which there is no representation for him, and in view of the fact that there is a counsel representing the 2^nd respondent in the trial Court, it would be appropriate to allow this civil revision petition permitting the petitioner to serve notice of the C.M.A.No.6 of 2019 on the learned counsel appearing for the 2^nd respondent in O.S.No.98 of 2018 in the Court of the Junior Civil judgecum-Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Razole.

¶12

With the above observations and directions, the civil revision petition is allowed. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed.

¶13

10^th December, 2021 Js.

¶14

_________________________ R. RAGHUNANDAN RAO, J.

¶15

RRR,J 3 C.R.P.No.773 of 2020

¶16

HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R. RAGHUNANDAN RAO

¶17

C.R.P.No.773 of 2020

¶18

10^th December, 2021

¶19

Js.

Kommula Sumathi Devi v. Chelluboina Bulisatyam

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kommula Sumathi Devi v. Chelluboina Bulisatyam

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Lekkala Ananda Rao Vs Pedada Venkata Ramana

Polisetty Andalamma Vs Yarramsetti Punyavathi

Bollu Veera Raghavaiah Chowdary Vs Madyanapu Ramakrishna Das

Smt.Alluri Satyavathi Vs Smt.Gudivaka Swarnalatha

Kallamadi Obulamma, Vs Yerragudi kareem sab(Died by his L.R.S)

Kallamadi Obulamma Vs Yerragudi kareem sab(Died by his L.R.S)