Dismissed¶24

Apsrtc v. Nagothi Prashanth Kumar

Andhra Pradesh HC23 Oct 2025MACMA/1348/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Andhra Pradesh High Court, Amaravati; MACMA No. 1348 of 2014; APSRTC v. Nagothi Prashanth Kumar; appeal under Order 41 CPC against Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal-cum-VI Additional District Judge, Gooty, Anantapur order dated 04-01-2011 in OP/MVOP No. 512 of 2009; IA No. 1 of 2011 (MACMAMP 5010 of 2011) condonation of 175 days' delay Section 151 CPC; IA No. 2 of 2011 (MACMAMP 5277 of 2011) stay of execution; no representation for appellant; fresh vakalath not filed; Registry notice returned 'no such person'; dismissed for non-prosecution; no order as to costs; Justice A. Hari Haranadha Sarma; 24.10.2025.

What did the court decide?

The present MACMA is dismissed for non-prosecution, as there is no proper representation or prosecution on behalf of the appellant. ¶24

Apsrtc Vs Nagothi Prashanth Kumar — Andhra Pradesh HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

¶1

[3520]

¶2

APHC010371432014

¶3

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

¶4

FRIDAY,THE TWENTY FOURTH DAY OF OCTOBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE

¶5

PRESENT

¶6

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE A. HARI HARANADHA SARMA MOTOR ACCIDENT CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL NO: 1348/2014

¶7

Between:

¶8

APSRTC, REP. BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR, BUS BHAVAN, MUSHIRABAD, HYDERABAD.

¶9

...APPELLANT

¶10

AND

¶11

NAGOTHI PRASHANTH KUMAR, Minor Rep. by N.F. Guardian, Mother N. Ramadevi. R/o. D.No. 6-4-871, Mangalavari Colony, Anantapur.

¶12

...RESPONDENT

¶13

Appeal filed under Order 41 of CPC praying thet the Highcourt may be pleased toto allow the appeal by setting aside the impugned order in OP No. 512 of 2009 dated 04-01-2011 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal-Cum-VI Additional District Judge, Gooty, Anantapur and to pass

¶14

IA NO: 1 OF 2011(MACMAMP 5010 OF 2011

¶15

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 175 days in filing the MACMA in MVOP No. 512 of 2009 on the file of Chariman Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal-Cum-VI Additional Dist. Judge, Gooty, Anantapur dated 4-1-2011 and pass

¶16

IA NO: 2 OF 2011(MACMAMP 5277 OF 2011

¶17

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 grant stay of all further proceedings including execution in MOP No. 512 of

¶18

2009 on the file of Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal Cum VI Addl. District Judge, Gooty, Anantapur dt. 4-1-2011 pending disposal of the above MACMA and pass

¶19

Counsel for the Appellant:

¶20

1.W V S RAJESWARI

¶21

Counsel for the Respondent:

¶22

JUDGMENT:

¶23

On 26.06.2025, there was no representation for both sides. On 04.07.2025, it was represented that fresh vakalath will be filed for the appellant. Considering the context of the case, notice to the respondent/claimant was ordered. The notice sent by the Registry was returned with an endorsement “no such person. No fresh vakalath is filed for the appellant.

¶24

There is no proper representation or prosecution on behalf of the appellant. Hence, the present MACMA is dismissed for non-prosecution. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶25

As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions, if any pending and the Interim order granted earlier, if any, shall stand closed.

¶26

____________________________ A. HARI HARANADHA SARMA, J

¶27

24.10.2025 MH

¶28

¶29

HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE A. HARI HARANADHA SARMA

¶30

M.A.C.M.A.No.1348 of 2014

¶31