Second appeal against decrees in a title suit dismissed for default as appellant did not prosecute or pay imposed costs; no order as to costs.
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.
THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH :: AMARAVATI
THURSDAY, THE THIRD DAY OF OCTOBER
TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR
PRESENT
HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE T MALLIKARJUNA RAO
SECOND APPEAL NO: 834 OF 2002
Appeal filed under Section 100 of C.P.C, against the Judgment and Decree dated 19-04-2002 passed in A.S No. 102 of 1996 on the file of the V Additional District Judge, Tirupathi, confirming the Judgment and Decree dated 08-07-1996 passed in OS No. 180 of 1991 on the file of the I Additional District Munsif, Tirupathi.
Between:
AND
(Appeal against R5 is dismissed for default vide Court Order dated 24.10.2014)
...RESPONDENTS/PLAINTIFFS 1 & 2 AND D1, D2, D8 ANDD9
Counsel for the Appellant : SRI K G KRISHNA MURTHY
(NO REPRESENTATION)
Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1 & 2: SRI J UGRANARASIMHA
(NO REPRESENTATION)
The Court made the following JUDGMENT :
<
APHC010332672002
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction)
[3369]
THURSDAY,THE THIRD DAY OF OCTOBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE T. MALLIKARJUNA RAO
SECOND APPEAL NO: 834/2002
Between:
M.Gangadharam & 4 Others ...APPELLANT
AND
K R Subbaiah 5 Others
...RESPONDENT
Counsel for the Appellant:
1.KG KRISHNA MURTHY
Counsel for the Respondent:
1.J UGRANARASIMHA
The Court made the following JUDGMENT:
- This Second Appeal was filed by the appellants/defendants under Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (for short, 'C.P.C.') against the Judgment and decree, dated 19.04.2002 passed inA.S.No.102of1996on the file of learned V Additional District Judge, Tirupathi, whereinconfirmingthe judgment and decree, dated 08.07.1996 passed in O.S.No.180of1991onthe file of learned I Additional District Munsif, Tirupathi.
- Today, when the matter is taken up for hearing in themorningsession, no representation on behalf of either side. The matterwassubsequently passed over at 2.15 P.M.
V,.
- Accordingly, the Second Appeal is dismissed for default. However, there shall be no order as to costs.
Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, in this appeal shall stand
closed.
//TRUE COPY//
SD/- M.RAMESH BABU DEPUTY ^^^GISTRAR
SECTION OFFICER
To
HIGH COURT
DATED:03/10/2024
JUDGMENT
SA.No.834 of 2002
war
\o 16 JAN 2025 •Co m
^ Current Section
DISMISSING THE APPEAL FOR DEFAULT WITHOUT COSTS
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Mekala Gangadharam
Mekala Chengalrayulu
Jatti Muneiah
Chintha Kondaiah
Puvula Bakkaiah
Kutteppa Reddigari Subbaiah
T Mallikarjuna Rao
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
