The High Court dismissed Writ Petition No. 19840/2013 as infructuous upon the petitioner's submission that the cause no longer survived during the hearing on 10 September 2024.
The writ petition was dismissed as infructuous. No order as to costs. Pending miscellaneous applications closed.
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::AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction)
./
TUESDAY, THE TENTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER
TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR*^ 'k
1^.
m
PRESENT Co/!
V.*
X 7/.•
THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE K MANMADHA RAO
WRIT PETITION NO: 19840 OF 2013
Between:
V. Chandra Sekhar, S/o. V. Venugopal Chowdary, Aged about 37 years, R/o. Chevuru (V), Mudinepalli (M), Krishna District.
...Petitioner
AND
...Respondents
Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue a writ or order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, a) Declaring the proceedings of Respondent No.1 in L1/35347/2012 dt.05.05.2013 to the extent of imposing conditions of payment of Rs.1,85,000/ - (Rupees One Lakh Eighty Five Thousand) per annum and demarcation of the Respondent No.2's property- (fish tank) by the petitioner and the consequential notice of the Respondent No.2 dt.15.05.2013 demanding Rs. 1,85,000/as bad illegal, arbitrary and contrary to law and the directions of the this Hon'bleCourt in W.P. No. 31830/2012 dt.10.10.2012 and set aside the same,
✓
NO: 2 OF 2013 (WPMP. NO: 24320 OF 2013)
Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in thecircumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition,theHighCourt maybe pleased to suspend the proceedings of Respondent No.1 in Ll/35347/2012 dt.05.05.2013 to the extent of imposing conditions of payment of Rs.1,85,000/- (Rupees One Lakh Eighty Five Thousand)perannumand demarcation of the Respondent No.2's property (fishtank)bythepetitioner and the consequential notice of the Respondent No.2 dt.15.05.2013 demanding Rs. 1,85,000/-
I.A. NO: 1 OF 2013 (WVMP. NO: 2232 OF 2013)
Between:
Sri Jagannatha Swamy Devasthanam, Represented by itsExecutiveOfficer, Vadali Village, Mudinepalli Mandal, Krishna District
...Petitioner/Respondent No.2
AND
...Respondent/Writ Petitioner
...Respondent/Respondent
Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in thecircumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to vacate the interim order passed in WP MPNo. 24320/2013 dated 10.07.2013 in WP No. 19840/2013.
lA NO: 1 OF 2023
Between:
The Commissioner, Andhra Pradesh Endowments Department, Boggulankunta Hyderabad.
(Present now at Gollapudi Vijayawada)
...Petitioner/Respondent No.1
AND
...Respondent/Petitioner
...Respondent
Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in thecircumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to vacate the interim order passed in WP MPNo.24320of2013 dated 10-07-2013 in WP No. 19840 of 2013 and dismiss the main writ petition as devoid of merits and pass
Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI T S RAYALU
Counsel for the Respondent No.1: GP FOR ENDOWMENTS
Counsel for the Respondent No.2: PULIPATI RADHIKA
The Court made the following: Order
APHC010484052013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction)
[3310]
TUESDAY ,THE TENTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE K MANMADHA RAO
WRIT PETITION NO: 19840/2013
Between:
V. Chandra Sekhar,
...PETITIONER
AND
The Commissioner Of Endowments and Others Counsel for the Petitioner:
...RESPONDENT(S)
1.TS RAYALU
Counsel for the Respondent(S):
1.GP FOR ENDOWMENTS
2.PULIPATI RADHIKA
The Court made the following Order:
Today, when the matter is taken up for hearing, Mr.J.Sunil Kumar, learned counsel representing Mr.T.S.Rayulu, learnedcounselforthepetitioner submits that, the cause in the present writ petitiondoesnotsurvive,and it has become infructuous.
- Recording the above submission, the Writ Petition is dismissed as Infructuous. There shall be no order as to costs.
2
- As a sequel, miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall stand
closed.
Sd/- P.VENKATA RAMANA JOINT REGISTRAR
//TRUE COPY//
SEC OFFICER
To.
gsg
\
HIGH COURT
DATED: 10/09/2024
ORDER
WP.No.19840 of 2013
A?
0 8 OCT 2024
. Current section . ^
DISMISSING THE WP AS INFRUCTUOUS WITHOUT COSTS
V. Chandra Sekhar
The Commissioner of Endowments
Sri Jagannatha Swamy Devastanam
K MANMADHA RAO
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
