Dismissed

Mupparaju Kuchelaiah v. Kurra Sivannarayana

Andhra Pradesh HC22 Sept 2024CRP/2366/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a civil revision petition filed under Section 115 CPC against an order condoning a 19-day delay in filing an appeal, the Court held the delay was marginal and the reason provided by the petitioner was rightly accepted by the lower appellate court, dismissing the revision.

What did the court decide?

The Civil Revision Petition is dismissed. No order as to costs. Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, stand closed.

Mupparaju Kuchelaiah Vs Kurra… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Andhra Pradesh HC (2024)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI

¶3

MONDAY, THE TWENTY THIRD DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY

¶6

CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO: 2366 OF 2024

¶7

Petition under Section 115 of C.P.C, against the order and Decree passed in I.A.No.688 of 2012 in A.S.No of 2012, dated, 04.06.2012, on the^file of the District Judge, Guntur

¶8

Between:

¶9

Mupparaju Kuchelaiah, S/o Veeraiah, Aged about 72 years,^R/oD.No 12-80, Vinjanampadu Village, Hamlet of Kornepadu, Vatticherukuru Mandal, GunturDistrict.

¶10

...PETITIONER

¶11

Kurra Sivannarayana, S/o Sambasiva Rao, Aged about 27 Years, Occ; Business, R/o Vinjanamapadu Village, Vatticherukuru Mandal, Guntur District.

¶12

...RESPONDENT

¶13

lA NO: 1 OF 2024

¶14

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 of all further proceedings in I.A.No;^{688of2012inA.S.Noof} 2012 on the file of the District Judge, Guntur

¶15

Counsel for the Petitioner : SRI. BVSS BALAKRISHNA RANJIT Counsel for the Respondent: SRI. D KASIM SAHEB The Court made the following Order :

¶16

4^^

¶17

APHC011542032012

¶18

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶19

[3460

¶20

]

¶21

MONDAY ,THE TWENTY THIRD DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR

¶22

PRESENT

¶23

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY

¶24

CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO: 2366/2024

Between:

Mupparaju Kuchelaiah

...PETITIONER

AND

Kurra Sivanarayana

...RESPONDENT

Counsel for the Petitioner:

¶32

1 BVSS BALAKRISHNA RANJIT

¶33

Counsel for the Respondent:

¶34

D KASIM SAHEB.

¶35

Tfi^ourt made the following:

¶36

¶37

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY

¶38

CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO: 2366/2024

¶39

ORDER:

¶40

Aggrieved by the Order dated 04.06.2012 in I.A.No.688^of2012 in AS No.—of 2012 passed by the District Judge, Guntur,^{thepresentCivil} Revision Petition is filed.

¶41

Petitioner is the respondent. An appeal was filed questioning the Judgment and Decree in O.S.No.152 of 2009 dated 11.11.2011 passed by the V Additional Senior Civil Judge, Guntur.^Astherewas19 days delay in filing the appeal, the petitioner filed^{I.A.No.688of2012to} condone delay. The said application was allowed. Cuestioning^thesame, the present Civil Revision Petition is filed.

¶42

Heard the respective counsel.

¶43

This Court is of the view that the reason given^fordelaywas rightly construed by the lower Appellate Court. Further,^thedelayof19 days in filing the appeal is marginal. Therefore, this^{Courtdoesnotfind} any reason to interfere with the order of the trial Court.

¶44

¶45

¶46

Accordingly, the Civil Revision Petition is dismissed. No order as

¶47

to costs.

¶48

As a sequel, miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall stand closed.

¶49

Sd/- B PRASADA RAO ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

//TRUE COPY//

SECTION OFFICER

To,

The District Judge, Guntur, Guntur District

¶54

One CC to SRI. BVSS BALAKRISHNA RANJIT, Advocate [OPUC

¶55

One CC to SRI. D KASIM SAHEB, Advocate [OPUC]

¶56

Two CD Copies

Madhu

HIGH COURT

DATED: 23/09/2024

ORDER

CRP.No.2366 of 2024

o^ 1 £ NOV 202^1 r
.60,
. Current Section . ^

¶63

DISMISSING THE CRP

Mupparaju Kuchelaiah v. Kurra Sivannarayana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mupparaju Kuchelaiah v. Kurra Sivannarayana

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

Deepalli Naga Rani Vs The Tahsildar

Gandreti Bangarraju Vs The Tahsildar

Nidigattu Uma Vs The Tahsildar

Garaga Prabhakar Rao, East Godavari Dist Vs Garaga Venkata Rao, East Godavari Dist

Gandha Prasanna Murthy Vs Andhra Bank, a Government of India and Anothers

Chinamilli Krishna Murhty Vs Grandi China Appa Rao