Petitioner did not appear despite listing for dismissal. Court held it indicated lack of interest and dismissed the writ petition for non-prosecution with no order as to costs.
Writ petition dismissed for non-prosecution. No order as to costs.
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.
APHC010136672004
Bench Sr.No:-42 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH [3506] AT AMARAVATI
WRIT PETITION NO: 2770 of 2004
J.Velugonda Babu
...Petitioner
Vs.
Andhra Bank rep by Its Chief Manger and Others ...Respondent(s)
Advocate for Petitioner: Sri P SAI NATH
Advocate(s) for Respondent(s): - Dr.K LAKSHMI NARASIMHA
CORAM : SRI JUSTICE CHALLA GUNARANJAN
DATE : 19th December 2025
ORDER:
On 05.12.2025, as there was no representation for the petitioner,
the writ petition was directed to be listed under the caption “for dismissal”. Even today, despite the matter being listed under the caption “for dismissal”, there is no representation for the petitioner. It indicates that the petitioner is not interested in pursuing the matter.
2. D r.K.Lakshmi Narasimha, learned counsel for the respondents, is present.
2
3. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed for non-prosecution. No order as to costs.
As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions pending consideration, if any, in this case shall stand closed.
_____________________________ JUSTICE CHALLA GUNARANJAN Date:19.12.2025. cs
J.Velugonda Babu
Andhra Bank rep by Its Chief Manger and Others
Challa Gunaranjan
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
