Dismissed¶31

Badri Bharathi @ Vijaya Bharathi, Kadapa Dist v. Naru Prasad, Ysr Kadapa Dist & Anr.

Andhra Pradesh HC22 Dec 2025CMA/497/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Guardianship of minor; paternal grandmother as guardian; Section 10 of Guardian and Wards Act; G.O.P.No.53/2015; Principal District Judge Kadapa; dismissal of guardianship petition; Civil Miscellaneous Appeal 497/2017; appeal infructuous on minor attaining majority; cause does not survive; condonation of 120 days delay under Section 151 CPC; CMAMP 1875 of 2016; interim visitation/access to minor grandson Master Badri Kuishikesh; CMAMP 826 of 2017; no order as to costs; pending applications closed; respondents Naru Prasad and Smt Naru Lakshmi; appellant Badri Bharathi @ Vijaya Bharathi.

What did the court decide?

Since the minor child attained majority during the pendency of the appeal and the cause does not survive, the Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is dismissed as infructuous. ¶31

Badri Bharathi @ Vijaya Bharathi, Kadapa Dist Vs Naru Prasad, Ysr Kadapa Dist & Anr. — Andhra Pradesh HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

¶1

APHC010222502017

¶2

[3524]

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶4

TUESDAY, THE TWENTY THIRD DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE

¶5

PRESENT

¶6

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI NATH TILHARI

¶7

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE MAHESWARA RAO KUNCHEAM

¶8

CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL NO: 497/2017

¶9

Between:

¶10

BADRI BHARATHI @ VIJAYA BHARATHI, KADAPA DIST, W/O.BADRI SUBBARAYUDU HINDU, AGED 50 YEARS OCC:HOUSEWIFE, R/O.OLD BAZAR STREET KODUR PANCHAYAT, KODUR MANDAL KADAPA DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH

¶11

...APPELLANT

¶12

AND

¶13

NARU PRASAD YSR KADAPA DIST ANR, S/O.CHINNAIAH HINDU, AGED 46 YEARS OCC:BUSINESS, R/O.UNGARALA NAGAR KODUR R.S. POST AND MANDAL Y.S.R.KADAPA DISTRICT

¶14

SMT NARU LAKSHMI, W/O.PRASAD, HINDU, AGED 43 YEARS, OCC:HOUSEWIFE, R/O.UNGARALANAGAR KODUR R.S. POST & MANDAL Y.S.R. KADAPA DISTRICT ANDHRA PRADESH

¶15

...RESPONDENT(S):

¶16

Appeal Under Section _____against orders appeal questioning the order in G.O.P.No.53/2015 dt_16-03-2016 on the file of the court of the Principal District Judge, Kadapa

¶17

IA NO: 1 OF 2016 (CMAMP 1875 OF 2016)

¶18

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 condone the delay of 120 days in filing the above appeal and pass

¶19

IA NO: 2 OF 2017(CMAMP 826 OF 2017)

¶20

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

¶21

¶22

direct the respondents to allow petitioner and her family members to see and interact with her minor grandson Master Badri Kuishikesh pending disposal of the above appeal

¶23

Counsel for the Appellant:

¶24

1.PRATHIBA BEJJARAM

¶25

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

¶26

1.O MANOHER REDDY

¶27

The Court made the following:

¶28

JUDGMENT: (per Hon’ble Sri Justice Maheswara Rao Kuncheam)

¶29

The petition filed by paternal grandmother seeking appointment as guardian of minor child as well as other reliefs under Section 10 of Guardian and Wards Act was dismissed by the learned Principal District Judge, Kadapa. Aggrieved by the same, the present appeal was preferred by the paternal grandmother.

¶30

Sri Y. Phani Babu, learned counsel representing learned counsel for the appellant submits that during the pendency of the appeal, the minor child attained majority. Making the said submission, he states that in view of efflux of time, the cause in the writ petition does not survive.

¶31