Disposed¶32

Smt. Sontyana Swapna v. Smt. Alugolu Pydiraju

Andhra Pradesh HC3 May 2026CRP/843/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Andhra Pradesh High Court at Amaravati; CRP No.843/2026; Justice Tarlada Rajasekhar Rao; decided 04.05.2026; warrant under Order XXI Rule 43 CPC; E.P.No.182 of 2024 in O.S.No.716 of 2023; Special Judicial Magistrate (Excise) cum III Addl. Civil Judge (JD), Vizianagaram; challenge to execution warrant; ex parte decree set-aside application; Section 5 Limitation Act condonation; conditional interim stay dated 13.03.2026 with Rs.1,00,000/- deposit; petition disposed with directions, no costs.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner directed to prosecute the pending application for setting aside the ex parte decree before the trial Court; respondent directed not to insist on the Execution Petition for three weeks; no order as to costs; pending interlocutory applications closed. ¶32

Smt. Sontyana Swapna Vs Smt. Alugolu Pydiraju — Writ and Judicial Review | Andhra Pradesh HC (2026)

¶1

[3330]

¶2

APHC010139792026

¶3

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

¶4

MONDAY,THE FOURTH DAY OF MAY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO: 843/2026

¶6

Between:

¶7

SMT. SONTYANA SWAPNA, , W/O S. SIVA BABU, AGE 37 YEARS, OCC NURSE, R/O YSR NAGAR, VIZIANAGARAM, VIZIANAGARAM DIST.

¶8

...PETITIONER

¶9

AND

¶10

SMT ALUGOLU PYDIRAJU, W/o Veerabhadrudu, Age 56 years, Occ House-Wife, R/o Jonnaguddi, Viziangaram, Vizianagaram Dist.

¶11

...RESPONDENT

¶12

Petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India,praying that in the circumstances stated in the grounds filed herein,the High Court may be pleased topleased to set aside the warrants in EP No. 182 of 2024, dated 21-01-2026 in OS No. 716 of 2023, before the Hon'ble Spl Judicial Magistrate of First Class for Trail of Cases under AP Prohibition and Excise Act Cum III Addl. Civil Judge (Junior Division) at Vizianagaram

¶13

IA NO: 1 OF 2026

¶14

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 pleased to dispense with the Certified Copy of the impugned warrants dated 21.01.2026, passed in E.P. NO. 182/2024 IN O.S. NO. 716/2023, on the file of the SPL JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS FOR TRIAL OF CASES UNDER AP PROHIBITION AND EXCISE ACT CUM III ADDITIONAL CIVIL JUDGE (JUNIOR DIVISION): AT VIZIANAGARAM. in the above C.R.P.

¶15

IA NO: 2 OF 2026

¶16

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 pleased to grant interim stay on all further proceedings in the EP No. 182 of 2024, including the warrants issued, dated: 21-01-2026 in OS No. 716 of 2023, before the Hon'ble Spl Judicial Magistrate of First Class for Trail of Cases under AP Prohibition and Excise Act Cum III Addl. Civil Judge (Junior Division) at Vizianagaram, till the disposal of the main case

¶17

¶18

Counsel for the Petitioner:

¶19

1.MANDAPATI MURALI KRISHNA

¶20

Counsel for the Respondent:

¶21

1.KANAKALA DEVI PRASANNAKUMAR

¶22

The Court made the following:

¶23

¶24

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO: 843 of 2026

¶25

ORDER:-

¶26

The present Civil Revision Petition is filed under Section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 seeking to set aside the warrant issued under Order XXI Rule 43 of the C.P.C. in E.P.No.182 of 2024, dated 21.01.2026, in O.S.No.716 of 2023 on the file of the learned Special Judicial Magistrate of First Class for Trail of cases under A.P.Prohibition and Excise Act-cum-III Additional Civil Judge (Junior Division) at Vizianagaram.

¶27

Heard Sri Mandapati Murali Krishna, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Kanakala Devi Prasannakumar, learned counsel for the respondent.

¶28

On 13.03.2026, upon hearing the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the petitioner, this Court took a lenient view and granted interim stay as prayed for, on condition of the petitioner depositing an amount Rs.1,00,000/-(Rupees One Lakh only) within a period of four weeks, failing which interim stay granted shall automatically stand cancelled without further reference of this Court.

¶29

Accordingly, the petitioner herein has deposited the said amount. Now, even if this Court set aside the impugned Rule 43 notice and warrant, the petitioner gains nothing.

¶30

¶31

Learned counsel for the petitioner also stated that the petitioner herein filed an application to set aside the ex parte decree along with an application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act.

¶32

Hence, the present Civil Revision Petition is disposed of directing the petitioner herein to prosecute the application filed for setting aside the ex parte decree before the trial Court. However, the respondent is directed not to insist the Execution Petition for a period of three weeks from today. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶33

As a sequel thereto, interlocutory applications pending if any,

¶34

shall stand closed.

¶35

___________________________________ JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO

¶36

Date: 04.05.2026 KBN

¶37

¶38

191

¶39