Dismissed

Jeedipally Laxmi [Died] Medak Dist and 2 Others v. Chelmeda Narayana, Medak Dist and 2 Others

Telangana HC14 Dec 2021CRP/3607/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Justic A.Venkateshwara Reddy dismissed Civil Revision Petition No. 3607 of 2014 as infructuous because the underlying civil suit in OS No. 48 of 2007 had been dismissed for default on 22.09.2021, leaving no cause to survive. Pending miscellaneous applications stood closed with no order as to costs.

What did the court decide?

Civil Revision Petition No. 3607 of 2014 dismissed as infructuous; pending miscellaneous applications closed.

Jeedipally Laxmi [Died] Medak Dist and 2… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Telangana HC (2021)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD

¶3

TUESDAY, THE FOURTEENTH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY ONE

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE A.VENKATESHWARA REDDY

¶6

CIVIL REVISION PETITI ON NO: 3607 OF 2014

¶7

Petition under Artide 227 of Constitution of lndia, to revise the order dated 0610812014 made in lA No.146/14 and lA No.147l2O14in OS No.48/2007 on the file of the Court of the Junior Civil Judge, at Medak.

¶8

Between:

¶9

Smt Jeedipally Laxmi [DIED], W/o Late J.Narasimhulu.

¶10

!^..leddlpa!!y 9atyanarayana,^{S/o LateJ. Narasimulu, Aged 49 years.}

¶11

Jeddipally Yadagiri, S/o Late J.Narasimulu, Aged 48 years. Both are Rt/o Durgamma Basthi, Ramayampet Village & Mandal, Medak District.)

¶12

,..PETITIONERS/RESPONDENTS/PLAINTIFFS

¶13

AND

¶14

Chelmeda Narayana, S/o Late Chinna Mallaiah, Aged 55 years.

¶15

R/o.Ramayampet Vittage'& Mandal, Medak Disirici

¶16

Chelmeda Yellawa, W/o Late Chinna Mallaiah, Aged 74 yearc, Ramayampet Village & Mandal, Medak District.

¶17

....Respondents/ Petitioners/Defendants 1 & 2

¶18

AL.Uday Shankar, S/o Laxmipathi, Aged 48 years, R/o Hyderabad. rRespondent^{No 3 herein} ":.kTSBEi'oTx,?ilIl?3lifSIt/ 3RD DEFENDANr

¶19

CRPMP. NO: 4913 0F 2014

¶20

Petition under Section 151 CPC of praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High court may be pleased to suspend the operation of the order passed in l.A.No. 147 of 2014 in O.S.No. 48 of 2007 dt. 06-08-2014

¶21

For the Petitioners : SRI P.GOVIND REDDY, Advocate

¶22

For the Respondents : SRI G.ANANDAM, Advocate

¶23

(

¶24

The Court mide the following: ORDER

HON'BLE S RI JUSTICE A.VENKATESHWARA REDDY CML I EVISION PETITION No.36O7 OF 2Cr14

¶29

ORDER:

¶30

Heard iearned counsel for petitioners and respondents Perused the case status informatiorr which shows that t re suit in OS.No.4S of 2007 before the trial Court was di ;missed lor default on 22.09.2021 .

¶31

Having :egard to the case status inlormation, as no cause surviv:s, this Civil Revision Petitron is clismissecl as infructuor s.

¶32

Pending miscellaneous applications, if an;v, shall

¶33

stand closed. No order as to costs.

¶34

Sd/-B.SATYAVATHI ASSISTANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// Nt-"-'

¶35

ISECTION OFFICER

¶36

¶37

)1. The Junior One CC to Sri Civil P: . udge, iovind Medak.Reddy, Advocate^(OPUC) 3. One CC to Sri G \nandam, Advocate^(OPUC)

¶38

Two CD Copies One Spare Copy Kjr{

HIGH COURT

DATED:1 4112121t21

ORDER

CRP.No.3607 c t 2014

1
€5lAir.: ()i-
1,,
II ) .1r Z il'll?-Pl

¶44

Dismissed as nfructuous.

¶45

Jeedipally Laxmi [Died] Medak Dist and 2 Others v. Chelmeda Narayana, Medak Dist and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jeedipally Laxmi [Died] Medak Dist and 2 Others v. Chelmeda Narayana, Medak Dist and 2 Others

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

Mrs. Ann Catherine Helen Decruz Vs Mr. T.Manipal Reddy

Kunja Bhaskar Vs Korsa Mallaiah

Nalladi Manasa , Danda Manasa Vs Nalladi Vijay Kumar

The Nizam Sugars Limited (Nsl) Vs Edamakari Laxma Reddy

Smt. Rehana Begum Vs Shaik Samad

The Nizam Sugars Limited (Nsl) Vs Edamakanti Laxma Reddy