Dismissed

T.Satyanarayana Prasad v. Noor Mohammed Syed

Telangana HC5 Feb 2021CRP/147/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Civil revision petition challenging a notice to appear in enforcement proceedings where the petitioner failed to approach the appellate court for stay. Petition dismissed as misconceived, but appellate court directed to decide stay application expeditiously.

What did the court decide?

The Civil Revision Petition is disposed of. The Appellate Court is directed to consider and dispose of I.A. No. 117 of 2021 in A.S. No. 226 of 2018 in accordance with law as expeditiously as possible.

T.Satyanarayana Prasad Vs Noor Mohammed Syed — Execution and Attachment | Telangana HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA

¶2

AT HYDERABAD

¶3

FRIDAY, THE FIFTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY ONE'

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE A.RAJASHEKER REDDY

¶6

CIVIL REVtsto N PETITIO N NO: 147 oF 2021

¶7

Petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of lndia, aggrieved by the Order dared' 17'122020 in E.A No.12O ot 2o2o in E.p.No.267 0f 2o2o in o.s.No.2466 0f 2009 on the fire of the court of the VIil Additionar senior civir Judge, Ranga Reddy District, at L.B. Nagar.

¶8

Between:

¶9

T S-a_tyanarayanp ?las.ag, S/o_ Kishan prasad, Hindu, aged about 65 vears. Occ. B usr ness, R/o. H. N o..1 _2/3 Vem ukunta, Cn j"oiii"gli"S;;;l;;;jt;"M:;;: Ranga Reddy District.

¶10

AND

¶11

... Petition e r/J D Rt/Defe nda n t

¶12

Noor Mohammed Sved. S/o.fi.S.Jaffer Sahab Muslim, aged about 66 vears. occ. Busienss. R/o.'pro*vo s, Annip-urna-iiirlii,,"o"nT'iJG;;;;ih-i;i.i " Chandanagar, Seritingampaly M;;a;i ii;.d'illi'oi1i.tri.t.

¶13

...RespondenUDHR/plaintiff

¶14

lA NO: 1 OF 2021

¶15

Petition under section 15'r cpc praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit fired therewith, the High court may be preased to stay the proceedings in the EA No. 120 or 2020 in E.p.No.267 0r 2o2o in o.s.No.2466 0f 2009 Dated 17l1212020 on the fire of the Vilr Additionar Senior civir Judge, Ranga Reddy District, at L.B. Nagar, tiil the disposar of the A.s.No.226 of 20.18 on the fire of the Honbre XV Additionar District Judge, Ranga Reddy District at prashanthnagar, Kukatpally, pending disposal of the C.R.p.

¶16

Counsel for the petitioner: SRt S. SYAM SUNDER RAO

¶17

Counsel for the Respondent: --__

¶18

The Gourt made the following: ORDER

¶19

HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE^{A.RAJASHEKERREDDY}

¶20

Civi I Revision^{Petition No.147 ot 2021}

¶21

ORDER:

¶22

Thiscivilrevisionpetitionisfiledagainstthenotice daled17.12.2020issuedtopetitioner/J.Dr.,toappearinpersonbeforethe Courton22.12.2020inE.A.No.120of2o2OinE.P.No.267of2020in o.s.No.2466 of^{2009 on the file of the Vlll Additional seniorcivil Judge,} RangaReddyDistrictatL'B.Nagar,filedbyrespondenUDHr',forpolice protection.

¶23

2.HeardSris.SyamSunderRao,learnedcounselforthepetitioner' and perused the^{material on record.}

¶24

Learned counsel^{for the petitioner submits that as the petitioner filed} statutory appeal^{in A.S.No.226 of 2018 against the judgment and decreein} O.S.No.2466 of 2009^{and also filedl.A.No.117 of 2021 in A'S No'226of} 2018 for^grant of stay,^{unless stay is granted in the said appeal, the court} below cannot^{proceedfurtherin the E.P.}

¶25

lt is to be seen that^{the suit was decreed on 19'07'2018and the} petitioner filed appeal in A.S.No.226^{of 2018, and it is not known as to why} he has not moved^{any interlocutoryapplication in the said appeal, but he} moved the lnterlocutory^{Application for grant of stay onlyin the year 2021.} Since the impugned^{notice was issued in E.A'No'120of 2020 in} E.p.No.267 of^2O2O to^{appear in person before the court, the petitioner} in spite of approaching^{the appellatecourt for pressing LA.No.117 of 2021} for grant of stay, he approached^{this courtand as such,the civil revision} petition is misconceived. However, as^{it is statedthat I.A.No.117of 2021}

¶26

AR\ 2 C,R.P.No,147 of tvl

¶27

¶28

in A.S.No.226 oI 2018 is^{pending, the appellate Court is directed to} consider and dispose^{of the same in accordance with law as expeditiously} as^possible, since it is stated^{thatE.P., is pending'}

¶29

With the above observation,^{the Civil Revision Petition is disposed}

¶30

of. No order as to costs.

¶31

IVliscellaneous^{petitions, if any pending in this revision, shall stand}

¶32

closed.

¶33

SD/. NAYANI CHANDRASEKHAR^RAO ASSISTANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY/I (-n) SECTION OFFICER

¶34

To, 1 . The Vlll Additional Senior^{CivilJudge, Ranga Reddy District,at L.B. Nagar.} 2. One CC to Sri S. Syam Sunder^{Rao, Advocate} [OPUC] 3. Two CD Copies MMK

HIGH COURT

ARRJ

DA'IED:0510212021

it
B,
,1.
d
22 tEB 2021 iJ
.+
*
.t ,:t0
Dr:+nr.'a.r;

¶40

ORDER

¶41

CRP.No.147 ol²⁰²¹

¶42

DISPOSING^{OF THE GIVIL REVISION PETITION}

¶43

@sfl,,

T.Satyanarayana Prasad v. Noor Mohammed Syed

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

T.Satyanarayana Prasad v. Noor Mohammed Syed

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

M/s.B S Limited (In Liquidation) Vs State Bank of India

M/s. InterGlobe Aviation Limited Vs Meeta Jain

M/s. InterGlobe Aviation Limited Vs Vinay Jain

The Fishermen Cooperative Society, Vs Sri Devender

M/s. Raja Rajeswari Constructions (India) Pvt. Ltd., Vs M/s. Ncc Limited

M/s. Raja Rajeswari Constructions (India) Pvt. Ltd., Vs M/s. Ncc Limited