The High Court of Telangana dismissed the second appeal at the admission stage without costs because the appellants were absent and their counsel stated there were no instructions to pursue the litigation.
Second Appeal dismissed; no costs awarded; pending miscellaneous applications stood closed.
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.
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATEOF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
IVONDAY, THE SEVENTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY TWO
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE P.SREE SUDHA
SECOND APPEAL NO: 588 OF 2012
Appeal Under Section 1OO of CPC against theJudgmentand Decreedated 28.02.2012 made in A.S.No.115 of 2009 onthe file of the Court of the lV Additional District Judge(FTC), Warangal, Preferred againstthe Decree in O.S.No.19of 2007 dated 20.07.2009 on the file of the Courtof the Senior Civil Judge, Janagaon.
Between:
AND
...RESPONDENTS/DEFNDANTS
Counsel for theAppellants:SRI BANKATLALMANDHANI
Counsel for the RespondentNos.1,3, 4 & 5: SRI T' P' ACHARYA
Counsel for theRespondent Nos'6 to 13: NONE APPEARED
The Court deliveredthe following: JUDGMENT
THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSIICEP. SREESUDHA
ND APPEAL No.588
JUDGMENT
Appellonts' counselpresent ond stotedthot there ore no instructions from the oppellonts
As per the docket order doted 02.02.2022,the respondents' counsel informed thot oppellontsl, 4 ond 5 ore no more.
Todoy, when the moiter is token up for heoring, there is no representotion for the oppellonts.Therefore, this Court is of the consideredview thot the oppellonts ore not interested iopursue the litigotion ondno
purpose would be served in continuing the oppeol.
Hence, ihe Second Appeol is dismissed.No costs.
Pending miscelloneous opplicotions, if ony,sholl
stond closed.
SD/-K.SRINIVASA RAO JOINT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// qD SECTION OFFICER
To,
---.
4.\} 1\
HIGH COURT
DATED: 0710312022
JUDGMENT
?1
G
a
.^,$
st
o
+
SA.No.588 of 2012
DISMISSING THE S.A. AT THE ADMISSION STAGE WITHOUT COSTS
Palayakula Mustafa Kareemuluha and 11 others
Razia Sulthana and 4 others
P. Sree Sudha
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
