The High Court dismissed a Civil Revision petition filed under Article 226 and Section 151 CPC for default due to the petitioner's non-prosecution and lack of proper representation.
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.
[3218 ]
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OFTELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
TUESDAY,THE ELEVENTH DAY OF OCTOBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY TWO
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE A.VENKATESHWARAREDDY CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO: 4398 OF 2014
Petition under article 227 Constitution of lNdia, aggrievedby the Order dated 3011012014 in E.P No. 7 to 2013 in O.S.No.5450of 2009 on the file of the lllAddl. Rent Controller, Hyderabad cum XV Junior CivilJudge ,Hyderabad.
Between:
AND
...RESPONDENTS/JDR 2to4lDEFENDANTS2to4
CRPMP. NO: 6014 OF 2014
Petition under Section 151 CPCpraying thatin the circumstancesstated in the affidavit filed in support of thepetition, theHigh Court may be pleasedto stay the proceedings in Docket order dt.30.'10.2014in E P No.7 of 2013in O.S.No.5450 of 2009 on the file of thelll Additional Rent Controller'Hyderabad cum XV Junior Civil Judge, Hyderabad.
Counsel for the Petitioner:SRl. S.SYAMSUNDERRAO
Counsel for the Respondents:SRl. C.MALLIKARJUN
The Court made the following; ORDER
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE A.VENKATESHWARA REDDY CIVIL REVISION PETITroN No.4398 0F 2014 ORDER:
None appears on behalf of the revision petitioner. This revision petition is filed in the year 2014 assailing the orders in EP No.7 of 2013 in O.S.No.5450 of 2009 on the file of the III Additional Rent Controller - cum - XV Junior Civil Judge, Hyderabad wherein attachment of movables of judgment debtor Nos. I and 2 are ordered. Hence, presence or representation on behalf of revision petitioner is felt essential. Considering the proceedings dated 24 .O9.2O22 I do not find any merit to adjourn the matter in the absence of proper representation on behalf of the revision petitioner. Accordingly, this Civil Revision petition is dismissed for default for non-prosecution. In the circumstances of the case, there sha1l be no order as to the. costs. Miscellaneous applications, if any pending, shall
stands closed.
/
SD/-P. PADMANABHA REDDY ASISTANT REGISTRAR
//TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER
To,
- Two CD copies
B M Pi^q.
HIGH COURT
DATED:1111012022
ORDER
CRP.No.4398 of 2014
1 €
q
o
17 JAil 2tt?3
.!+
"r'i'
DISMISSING THE CRP FOR NON.PROSECUTION WITHOUT COSTS
d.1.0^, zr\rrl''-
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the revision petition should be allowed in the absence of proper representation.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
S. Mahender
M/s Kautilya Chit fund Pvt Ltd
M. Subash
P. Rama Rao
B. Swamy
A. Venkateswara Reddy
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
