Cilakapati Siddik Vs Smt. Khamrunnisa Begum

CILAKAPATI SIDDIK, S/O. CH. KHASIM EMPLOYEE IN FERTILIZERS AND CHEMICAL S TRAVANCORE LTD.,(FACT) NEAR FOOD CORPORATION O F INDIA GODOWN, ONGOLE, R/ O . D.NO. 7-1784/5-A, 4TH LANE, SRINAGAR, GUNTUR.

¶10

...APPELLANT

¶11

AND

¶12

SMT KHAMRUNNISA BEGUM, W/o. Ch.Siddik, R/o. D.No. 330106, Malik Manzal, Sout h Jail Road, Visakhapatnam.

¶13

...RESPONDENT

¶14

Appeal under secti o n________ against orders

¶15

IA NO: 1 OF 2011(FCAMP 385 OF 2011

¶16

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circu m stances stated in the affidavit filed in su p port of the petition, the High Court m a y be pleased to stay the execution of the Order and decree in OP No. 1097 of 2009 on the file of the Court of the Judg e , Additional Family Court Visakhapat n am pending the FCA before this Hon'ble C ourt and pass

¶17

IA NO: 4 OF 2011(FCAMP 28919 OF 2011

¶18

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circu m stances stated in the affidavit filed in su p port of the petition, the High Court m a y be pleased

¶19

Counsel for the Appellant: 1.RAJA REDDY KONETI

¶20

2

¶21

Counsel for the Respondent:

¶22

1.A S C BOSE

¶23

CRIMINAL REVISION CASE NO: 1729/2011

¶24

Between:

¶25

CILAKAPATI SIDDIK, S/O CH. KHASIM EMPLOYEE IN FERTILIZERS AND CHEMICALS TRAVANCORE LTD FACT NEAR FOOD CORPORATION OF INDIA GODOWNS, ONGOLE R/O D.NO.7-1784/5-A, 4TH LANE, SRINAGAR, GUNTUR.

¶26

...PETITIONER

¶27

AND

¶28

SMT KHAMRUNNISA BEGUM AND ANOTHERS, W/O CH. SIDDIK R/O D.NO.33-1-6 MALIK MANZAL, SOUTH JAIL ROAD ,VISAKHAPATNAM

¶29

THE STATE OF AP REP BYITS PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF BUILDINGS, HYDERABA.D

¶30

...RESPONDENT(S):

¶31

Revision filed under Section 397/401 of CrPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the Criminal Revision Case, the High Court may be pleased to appeal against the order passed in OP.NO.1002/2009 on the file of the Court of Judge Additional Family court, Visakhapantam dt. 10-5-2011

¶32

IA NO: 1 OF 2011(CRLRCMP 2579 OF 2011

¶33

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 suspend the order passed in OP.NO.1002/2009 on the file of the Judge Additional Family court, Visakhapatnam, dt. 10-5-2011 pending disposal of the crlRc and pass

¶34

Counsel for the Petitioner:

¶35

1.RAJA REDDY KONETI

¶36

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

¶37

1.A S C BOSE

¶38

2.PUBLIC PROSECUTOR (AP)

¶39

3

¶40

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE BATTU DEVANAND

¶41

&

¶42

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE A. HARI HARANADHA SARMA

¶43

FCA No.179 OF 2011 AND CRIMINAL REVISION CASE No.1729 OF 2011

¶44

COMMON JUDGMENT: (Per Hon’ble Sri Justice A.Hari Haranadha Sarma)

¶45

FCA No.179 of 2011 is directed against the order and decree passed in O.P.No.1097 of 2009 on the file of the Judge, Additional Family Court, Visakhapatnam dated 10.05.2011. The proceedings in O.P.1097 of 2009 were initiated for return of dowry amount and Jehaz etc. Criminal Revision Case No.1729 of 2011 is directed against the order in O.P.No.1002 of 2009 on the file of the Judge, Additional Family Court, Visakhapatnam, dated 10.05.2011. The proceedings in O.P.No.1002 of 2009 were initiated claiming maintenance in terms of Section 125 of Cr.P.C. The learned Judge, Additional Family Court, Visakhapatnam allowed O.P.1002 of 2009 and partly allowed O.P.No.1097 of 2009 by way of common order dated 10.05.2011.

¶46

Both the Family Court Appeal No.179 of 2011 and Criminal Revision Case No.1729 of 2011 filed by husband came up for hearing today. Both counsel reported that the parties are not in contact with them and there are no instructions.

¶47

Considering the representation and the conduct of the parties, who failed to respond in spite of posting the matter on 13.08.2025, 10.09.2025 and today, it is found clear that they are not interested in prosecuting the matters.

¶48

4

¶49