The High Court of Andhra Pradesh, in Appeal Suit No. 907/2018, dismissed an appeal against the dismissal of a suit for specific performance of contract due to default, as no counsel appeared for the appellants on the hearing date.
The appeal was dismissed for default. Miscellaneous petitions pending stood 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.
APHC010390162018
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
[3524]
THURSDAY ,THE THIRD DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI NATH TILHARI
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE MAHESWARA RAO KUNCHEAM
APPEAL SUIT NO: 907/2018
Between:
Mr.korada Ramesh Naidu and Others
...APPELLANT(S)
AND
Mr Pathivada Krishna and Others
...RESPONDENT(S)
Counsel for the Appellant(S):
1.KURITI BHASKARA RAO
Counsel for the Respondent(S):
1.G RAMA GOPAL
The Court made the following:
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI NATH TILHARI THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE MAHESWARA RAO KUNCHEAM
APPEAL SUIT NO: 907/2018
JUDGMENT: (per Ravi Nath Tilhari, J)
This appeal has been filed being aggrieved from the dismissal of the suit
for specific performance of contract.
“Learned counsel for the appellants is not available.
List the appeal under the caption “For Hearing” on 28.10.2024.”
As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous petitions, if any pending, shall also stand closed.
____________________ RAVI NATH TILHARI,J
______________________________ MAHESWARA RAO KUNCHEAM,J
Dated:03.04.2025 AG
136
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI NATH TILHARI THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE MAHESWARA RAO KUNCHEAM
APPEAL SUIT NO: 907/2018
Dated:03.04.2025 AG
Mr. Korada Ramesh Naidu and Others
Mr Pathivada Krishna and Others
Ravi Nath Tilhari
Maheswara Rao Kungeream
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
