The Hon'ble High Court of Andhra Pradesh dismissed the writ petition for quashing nomination lists and seeking injunction against payment of proceeds due to abatement following the death of the petitioner.
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.
HIGH COURT FOR THE S'I rsp;Hr'315i35 f l3jis,fliAr HyD ERABAD
TUESDAY, THE TI A uc us r *" r, 6,i Sfrff,iB.ir,a^lr?F
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRIJUSTICE ABHINAND KUMAR SHAVILI
Between:
WRIT P ETITI ON NO: 241370F 2012
Isi:JI fl,: fii li,.'sJ#iil: p,il,#l e nt or 1 o - 4 - 1 3 t 1 6 t [Bs6, [i]id AND
^, ,..PETITIONER
...RESPONDENTS
Petition under Articre 226 of rhe constitution of rndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit fired therewith, the High court may be preased to issues a writ, Direction or order parlicularly in the nature of writ of mandamus and order and direct the Respondents to direct the Respondent No.2 herein, to forbear from paying anything to the Respondents Nos.3 to 5 herein, under Serial Nos. 634719,635037, 63503s, 635040 and 66676, under Sectron 4sZA and Rule 2(1) of the Banking Companies Nominations Rules 19g5.
WPMP. NO: 30839 oF 2012
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 direct the respondents not to pay any amounts to the respondents Nos. 3 to S under Serial Nos. 634719,635037, 635039, 635040 and 66676 in this matter pending disposat of the above writ petition.
Counsel for the Petitioner: SRl. SAROSH SAM BASTAWALA
Counsel for the Respondent No.1: SRI NAMAVARAPU RAJESHWAR RAO, ASSISTANT SOLICITOR GENERAL
Counsel for the Respondent No.2: SRI T.V.K. MURTHY
Counsel for the Respondent No.3: SRI HARINATH NUNEPALLY
Counsel for the Respondent Nos.4 & 5: SRI E. MADAN MOHAN RAO
The Court made the following: ORDER
HON'BLESRI JUSTICEABHINANDKUN(AR JTIAVILI
w.P. No.24t31OF t2
ORDER:
When the matteris takenuP for hearing, learned counsel appearing for the Petitionersubmits that the riole petitioner had expired.
Recording the said submission, the W:it Petitionis dismissed as abated. However, liberry is given to the legal representatives of the petitioner to pursue the r remedies in accordance rvith lau,. No costs.
Miscellane ous petitions, il any, pendin g shall stand
clo s ccl.
Ass,sri$/it[EGTSiH C,, //TRUECOPYII SECTIONOFFICER
t"to,G"n",utoPucl '.iHiggE"iHffi[.ffi#3'}H.*8"?gffi
CHR ,/ ,,r
/-
HIGHCOURT
DATED:3110812021
ORDER
W.P.No.24137 of20'12
I 6t STAIA
:)
o
0 B oti20tl J5
i.)
a
+
a a' i:.. :
DISMISSING THE WRIT PETITION AS ABATED WITHOUT COSTS
q
e
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the writ petition is maintainable after the death of the principal petitioner.
Whether the High Court has jurisdiction to pass an injunction pending disposal under Section 151 CPC.
3 provisions across 3 enactments
U. I. Devaregowdappa and Ors.
Union of India
Indian Overseas Bank
Ameena Shakeel and Ors.
Abhinand Kumar Shavili
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
