Civil Miscellaneous Appeal No. 969 of 2007 filed under Section 28 of the Hindu Marriage Act was dismissed for default as the appellant failed to appear after being directed to attend a rehearing on 09.06.2022, with no representation available on that date or the day of judgment.
C.M.A. No. 969 of 2007 dismissed for default; no order as to costs.
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.
|3264 I
HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
THURSDAY, THE SIXTEENTH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY TWO
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE DT. JUSTICE SHAMEEM AKTHER AND
THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE JUWADI SRIDEVI
C.M.A. NO: 969 OF 2007
Appeal under Section 28 of Flindu Marriage Act, against the Order and decree in OP No.22 o'f 2004 daled 0711112007 on the file of the Court of the Senior Civil Judge, Mahabubnagar.
Between:
Smt P.Sunitha,
...APPELLANT
AND
Sri P.Ram tvlohan @ Madhu,
...RESPONDENT
For the Appellant : NONE APPEARED
For the Respondent : SRI C.B.RAM MOHAN REDDY, Advocate
The Court delivered the following : JUDGMENT
THE Ht )N'BLE Dr. JUSTICE SHAMEEM AH'fi{ER, AND
THE HC N'BLE SMT. JI.'STICE JUWADI SR]:I)E/I
CIVIL M :SCELLANEOUS APPEAL No.gI69 C t 2007
JUDGMENT: Pe'the Hon'bte Dr.SA,J)
On 09.0 ;,2022, as there was no represent.rtion for the appellant, the rlatter was directed to be listed tocir!, ulder the caption 'for or, lers'. Even today, there is no rep r(r:;e ntatio n for the appellant. It appears that the appellant has n:, interest to pursue the ma' ter.
Miscellan rous petitions pending, if any, shall ;t,lnc closed
There shall be ro order as to costs.
, SC . 8,.S.,]HIRANJEEVI //TRL'E COPYII -C}IN- REGISTRARi_ '\lL ,1' \ .L
ll: CTION OFF\CER
To
1 The Senior Civi Judge, at Mahabubnagar. (with records) 2 One CC to Sri( .B.Ram Mohan Reddy, Advocate [OPUC] 3 Two CD Copies 4 One Spare Cop,
Kj
-}{
I
HIGH COURT
DATED:1 6/06/2022
JUDGMENT
CMA.No.969 of 200'
:-::,<br>,. 9F
,// t 'r € i../i. <br>s
no .$'
.5 a
,(- ,/
.. 'J-rl\l \r ,.
CMA DISMISSED F( IR DEFAULT
a4
-:t-,
,
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the appeal should be dismissed for default due to lack of appearance by the appellant?
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Smt P.Sunitha
Sri P.Ram tvlohan @ Madhu
Shameem Akther
Juwadi Sridevi
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
