Disposed¶43

Gorla Satyanarayana Reddy v. Vallabhaneni Ramprasad

Andhra Pradesh HC2 Apr 2025AS/503/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Andhra Pradesh High Court first appeal disposed on out-of-court settlement; money decree for Rs.39,97,400/- under agreement of sale dated 18.10.2014 (O.S.No.85 of 2017, XV Addl. District Judge, Nuzvid); settlement of Rs.59,00,000/- via three Demand Drafts; parties directed to Execution Court where plaintiff's execution petition pending; interim order I.A.No.1 of 2024 (27.09.2024) vacated; Gorla Satyanarayana Reddy v. Vallabhaneni Ramprasad; no statute or precedent discussed.

What did the court decide?

Appeal Suit disposed of on the basis of the parties' settlement; parties directed to approach the Execution Court and file appropriate applications with liberty to deposit the demand drafts before it; interim order in I.A.No.1 of 2024 dated 27.09.2024 vacated; no order as to costs; pending miscellaneous petitions closed. ¶43

Gorla Satyanarayana Reddy Vs Vallabhaneni Ramprasad — Andhra Pradesh HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶43

Issue for consideration

Whether the first appeal against the money decree ought to be disposed of in view of the out-of-court settlement of Rs.59,00,000/-, and what directions should issue regarding deposit of the demand drafts and the pending execution petition before the Execution Court.

¶42

Ratio / Principle

On the parties' settlement, they were directed to approach the Execution Court and file appropriate applications; the demand drafts may be deposited before the Execution Court, which shall, after affording an opportunity of hearing to the parties, pass appropriate orders in accordance with law.

¶42

Key takeaways

The interim order granted by this Court in I.A.No.1 of 2024 on 27.09.2024 stands vacated.ratio¶45
No order as to costs; miscellaneous petitions, if any pending, shall also stand closed.ratio¶48

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

High Court of Andhra Pradesh at Amaravati (Special Original Jurisdiction), First Appeal No. 503 of 2024 (A.S. No.503 of 2024), decided 03.04.2025 by Ravi Nath Tilhari, J (author) and Maheswara Rao Kuncheam, J. Appeal by defendants/judgment-debtors against judgment and decree dated 19.07.2024 of the XV Additional District Judge, Krishna District at Nuzvid in O.S.No.85 of 2017, by which the respondent/plaintiff's suit for recovery was partly decreed with proportionate costs for Rs.39,97,400/- (advance under agreement of sale dated 18.10.2014 plus Rs.2,00,000/- spent) with interest at 18% p.a., subsequent interest at 12% p.a. on Rs.24,00,000/- till decree and 6% p.a. thereafter. Counsel for appellants reported an out-of-court settlement and offered three Demand Drafts totalling Rs.59,00,000/- towards full and final settlement; the respondent's execution petition against the decree was pending before the trial court. Held: parties directed to approach the Execution Court and file appropriate applications; demand drafts may be deposited before the Execution Court, which shall pass appropriate orders in accordance with law after hearing the parties. Interim order in I.A.No.1 of 2024 dated 27.09.2024 vacated. Appeal Suit disposed of; no order as to costs; pending miscellaneous petitions closed.

¶1

¶2

(RNT,J & MRK,J A.S. NO.503 OF 2024)

¶3

APHC010402832024

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI

¶5

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶6

[3524]

¶7

THURSDAY ,THE THIRD DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE

¶8

PRESENT

¶9

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI NATH TILHARI

¶10

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE MAHESWARA RAO KUNCHEAM

¶11

FIRST APPEAL NO: 503/2024

¶12

Between:

¶13

Gorla Satyanarayana Reddy and Others

¶14

...APPELLANT(S)

¶15

AND

¶16

Vallabhaneni Ramprasad

¶17

...RESPONDENT

¶18

Counsel for the Appellant(S):

¶19

1.K RATHANGA PANI REDDY

¶20

Counsel for the Respondent:

¶21

1.MANGENA SREE RAMA RAO

¶22

The Court made the following:

¶23

JUDGMENT:- (per Hon’ble Sri Justice Ravi Nath Tilhari)

¶24

Heard Sri Chandra Sekhar Reddy, learned counsel representing

¶25

Sri K.Rathangapani Reddy, learned counsel for the appellants and Sri Mangena Sree Rama Rao, learned counsel for the respondent.

¶26

This appeal has been filed by the appellants/defendants,

¶27

aggrieved from the judgment and decree dated 19.07.2024 passed in

¶28

¶29

(RNT,J & MRK,J A.S. NO.503 OF 2024)

¶30

O.S.No.85 of 2017 on the file of the XV Additional District Judge, Krishna District at Nuzvid, filed by the respondent/plaintiff for recovery of amount.

¶31

3. The suit was decreed in the following terms :

¶32

“In the result, the suit is partly decreed with proportionate costs for Rs.39,97,400/-(Rupees thirty nine lakhs, ninety seven thousand and four hundred only) being the advance amount under agreement of sale dated 18.10.2014 as well as amount Rs.2,00,000/- spent by the plaintiff along with interest at 18% p.a., with subsequent interest at 12% p.a., on the principal amount of Rs.24,00,000/- (Rupees twenty four lakhs only) from the date of suit till the date of decree and thereafter at 6% p.a, till realization.”

¶33

Learned counsel for the appellants submits that the parties have settled the matter out of Court. In pursuance of the said settlement, the appellants are ready to handover Demand Drafts (3 in Nos.) for an amount of Rs.59,00,000/- towards full and final settlement to the plaintiff/respondent. He further submits that the appeal may be closed by recording the settlement.

¶34

5. On 01-04-2025, the following order was passed :

¶35

“Learned counsels for the parties submit that there was a settlement between the parties for an amount of Rs.59,00,000/- against the decree of the learned Court, which is under challenge in the present appeal. The decree was for the recovery of Rs.44,63,200/- along with interest.

¶36

¶37

(RNT,J & MRK,J A.S. NO.503 OF 2024)

¶38

2. Learned counsel for the appellant has filed a memo to that effect annexing copies of Demand Drafts. He submits that the aforesaid Demand Drafts are with him, and he is ready to handover them.

¶39

3. Learned counsel for the respondents submits that he has no instructions to receive the aforesaid DDs., and prays for time to obtain instructions, as also for the appearance of the parties.

¶40

4. Post on 03.04.2025.”

¶41

Today, Sri Mangena Sree Rama Rao, learned counsel for the respondent/plaintiff, submits that the respondent, namely Vallabhaneni Ramprasad, is present before the Court. He further submits that the respondent has filed an execution petition for execution of the decree, which is under challenge in the present appeal and is pending before the Court of the XV Additional District Judge, Krishna District at Nuzvid.

¶42

We consider it appropriate to direct the parties to approach the Execution Court and file appropriate applications. The demand drafts may also be deposited before the said Court. The Execution Court, after affording an opportunity of hearing to the parties, shall pass appropriate orders in accordance with law.

¶43