The appeals filed under Section 19 of the Family Court Act were disposed of as not pressed. The appellant, desiring reconciliation, did not insist on the appeals.
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.
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
TUESDAY, THE TWENTY SEVENTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY ONE
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HIMA KOHLI AND THE HON'BLE SRIJUSTICE B. VIJAYSEN REDDY
F.CA. NO: 13 OF 2006 & CM A.NO.3893 0F 2003
FCA.NO.1 3 0F 2006:
Appeal Under Section 19 of Family Courl Act against the Judgment/Decree in o.P.No.461 of 2000 dated 16.05.2003 on the file of the court of the Judge, Family Court, Hyderabad.
Between:
G. Muralidhar Rao, S/o. late Durgaiah, Occ: Business, r/o H.No.12-110439, Warasiguda, Secunderabad.
,..APPELLANT
AND
Smt. G.Shalini, W/o G.lMuralidhar Rao, Occ: Household, r/o H.No.3-4-18g, Lingampally, Kachiguda, Hyderabad
...RESPONDENT
Gounsel for the Appellant: SRl. 6496/T SURYA SATISH
Counsel for the Respondent: SRl. V. V. PRABHAKARA RAO
GMA.NO.3893 0F 2003
Between:
G. I/uralidhar Rao, S/o. late Durgaiah, Occ: Business, r/o H.No.12-110439, Warasiguda, Secunderabad.
...APPELLANT
AND
Smt. G.Shalini, W/o G.lMuralidhar Rao, Occ: Household, r/o H.No.3-4-189, Lingampally, Kachiguda, Hyderabad
.,.RESPONDENT
Appeal Under Section 19 of Family Court Act against the JudgmenVDecree in O.P.No.403 of 2001 dated 16.05.2003 on the file of the Court of the Judge, Family Court, Hyderabad.
Counsel for the Appellant: SRl. T. SURYA SATISH
Counsel for the Respondent: SRl. V. V. PRABHAKARA RAO
The Court delivered the following: COMMON JUDGMENT
Items No.36-37
THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICEHIMA KOHLI AND TTIE HON'BLESRI JUSTICEB. VIJAYS EN REDDY
F.CA.No.13 OF2006 & CMA No.3893 OF 2003
COMMON JUDGMENT:(Perthe Hon'bletheChielJusticeHimakthli)
the respondent/wifeto reconcilelhe inter se disputes and re-unite'
disposed of as notpressedalong with the pendingapplications, if any'
//TRUE COPY//
Sd/- K.SRINIVAS RAO JOINT REGISTRAR
C1b
I
SECTION OFFICER
To,
tgbr\.
\5z
HIGH COURT
DATED: 2710412021
COMMON JUDGMENT
FCA.No.13 of2006 AND CMA.No.3893of 2003
I HE SIa
o.^
I
J
I j-) 1 7 i[ji! 2lit Z
.,,..r
./
. . r_:-,.
... . . ..:...-.;:'1.i
DISPOSING OF THE APPEAL'S
AS NOT PRESSEDNOT PRESSED
gX.v'
AS NOT PRESSEDNOT PRESSED
G. Muralidhar Rao
Smt. G. Shalini
Hima Kohli
B. V. Rajasekhara Reddy
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
