Second appeal against a decree confirming a suit for declaration of title and delivery of possession was dismissed for default because the appellants and their legal representatives failed to respond to notices and prosecute the appeal.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN
THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI
THURSDAY ,THE FIFTH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR
PRESENT
THE HON’LE SRI JUSTICE T MALLIKARJUNA RAO
SECOND APPEAL NO: 713 OF 2005
Appeal under section against the decree and judgment in A.S.No.68 of 2001 on the file of the court of the IV AdditionalDistrictjudge,Kurnool dated 16/03/2005 in A.S.No.68 of 2001 against in O.S.No.314of1998on the file of the II Additional Civil (Junior Division)Kurnool,dt30/07/2001.
Between:
...Appellant (Appellants)
AND
T
( Respondents 8 to 10 Represented by their Next Friend & Mother Smt. Rubina Khatoo, Respondent. 7 R/o. D.No. 65/62, Fort, Kurnool)
(R 2 is abated Vide C.O dt 20/09/2011)
...Respondents (Respondents)
lA NO: 1 OF 2024
Between:
C Kaleemullah, S/o Abdul Gafoor, D.No. 11/51, Osmania College Road Kurnool
...Petitioner/Respondent No.6
AND
....APPELLANTS/Respondent No.1 to 3
12 J. Raiz Khan, S/o. Late J. Manjoor Ali Khan R/o. D.No. 65/62, Fort, Kurnool minor.
(Respondents 8 to 10 rep. by their next friend and mother Smt. Rubina Khatoon, Respondent No.7 herein. R/o. D.No.65/62, Fort Kurnool,)
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 vacate the interim order passed in S.A.No. 713 of 2005 dated 18.08.2005 and dismiss the SA in the interest of Justice
I.A. NO: 1 OF 2005rSAMP. NO: 1415 OF 20051
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 grant stay of all further proceedings in execution of the decreein O.S.No. 314/1998 on the file of the Court of the lind Addititonal Junior Civil Judge, Kurnool as confirmed in AS.No. 68/2001 on the file of the Court of the IV Additional District Judge, Kurnool.
Counsel for the Appellant :SRI. T S ANAND
Counsel for the Respondent No 5 : SRI. R V SUBBA RAO
Counsel for the Respondent No 6 : SRI. J JANAKIRAMI REDDY Counsel for the Respondents No. 3,4, 7 to 10: None appeared
The Court made the following: ORDER
#5*
[3369]
APHC010499182005
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
THURSDAY, THE FIFTH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE T MALLIKARJUNA RAO
SECOND APPEAL NO: 713/2005
Between:
J. Manjoor Ali Khan (died) and Others
...APPELLANT(S)
AND
C Abdul Gafoor Died and Others ...RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Appellant(S):
1.TS ANAND
Counsel for the Respondent(S):
1.J JANAKIRAMI REDDY
2.RVSUBBA RAO
The Court made the following JUDGMENT:
- This Second Appeal has been filed by the Appellants/Appellants/ Defendants against the Decree and Judgment dated 16.03.2005,inA.S.No.68 of 2001 on the file of IV Additional District Judge, Kurnool (for short, ‘the 1 St Appellate Court’) confirming the decree and Judgmentdated30.07.2001, in O.S.No.314 of 1998 on the file of II Additional Junior Civil Judge, Kurnool (for short, ‘the trial Court’).
same to the plaintiff, and for declaration that the sale transaction took place between the defendants 1 and 2 and 3 are null and void,andforcostsofthe suit.
- On a representation made by the learned counsel for the appellants, this Court ordered notice to the appellants. Notices were returned as Appellant No.1 - Died, Appellant No.2 - returned unserved vide postal endorsement that “Incomplete Address”, Appellant No.3 - returned unserved vide postal endorsement that “Addressed Deceased. Hence return to sender”.
- Registry sent notices to the appellants as per theaddressesshownin the appeal. It seems that either the appellants or the legal representatives of the appellants have not come forward to proceed with the appeal. It further seems that they have no interest to prosecute the matter.
- Interlocutory applications pending, if any, in the appeal, shall also stand closed.
//TRUE COPY//
SD/- K TATA RAO DEPUT^REGISTRAR ^ SECT^ OFFICER
HIGH COURT DATED:05/12/2024
ORDER
SA.No.713 of 2005
tv.
t
I. O^ 3 0 DEC 2C2'i SP/Jrnjf
DISMISSING THE SECOND APPEAL FOR DEFAULT
1 provisions across 1 enactments
J. Manjoor Ali Khan
Mahaboob Miah
M. Umer Khatoon
C. Abdul Gafoor
Abdul Rasheed
C. Kaleemullah
T Mallikarjuna Rao
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
