The High Court at Hyderabad dismissed an appeal filed in the year 2000 as 'for non-prosecution' because the learned counsel for the appellants failed to appear to argue the case when the matter was listed for dismissal. No costs were awarded.
Appeal Suit dismissed for non-prosecution. No costs. Pending miscellaneous petitions stand 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.
[3216 ]
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATEOF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
THURSDAY,THE FOURTEENTHDAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENWTHREE
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE M.LAXMAN
APPEAL SUIT NO:1712 OF2000
Appeal under Section 96 of C.P.C against theJudgmentand DecreeDated 07.04.2000, made in O.S.No.15 of1997 on the file of the Court of the Senior Civil Judge, Wanaparlhy, MahabubnagarDistrict.
Between:
(Appellant Nos. 2 & 3 are brought on record as LRs of deceased Addellant No. I Vide court order dated08.04.2004in CMP No. 7914 of 2OO4l
...APPELLANT No.4
Appellant No. 4 is brought on recordas LR of deceasedAppellant No. 3 -asper Cbirrt order dated 12.09.2023, vide lANo.1 of 2023in AS No. 1712 ot2OOO.
AND
(Respondent No.1 BoyaRamulu Diedper LRs-RR- 5 to 10)
...RESPONOENTS
(Respondents Nos. 5 to 14are brough! on .r99qr-das LRs of deceased Hi.-J"na"nt Nos. I &3 as pei court ordEr ldated 02.01.2023, vide lA Nos. 3 & 6 ot 2b22in As No.1712 of 2ooo)
Counsel for the APpellant :SRl. M RAMARAO
Counsel fortheRespondents:SRl A NARASIMHAREDDY
The Court made thefollowing:
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE M.LAXF.{AN
{ ! I I ; I l :
APPEALS UIT No.L7t2 0F 2()()0
JUDGMENT:
i. Today, when the matter is called, there is no representation for the learned counsel for the appellaats, in spite of the matter being listed under the caption ,,for dismissal,,.
Sd/. B. SAryAVATHI DEPUTY REGISTRAT{
//TRUE COPY//
To,
SECTION OFFICER
HIGH COURT DNED:1410912023
JUDGMENT AS.No.1712 of 20OO
-( r\e STA).G
t
o 13 t!0 twI
;. :l
j< './
* cEi; c\i
\f
B lr )r"r
APPEAL IS DISMISSED FOR NON PROSECUTION
1 issue framed by the court
Whether an appeal contest should be allowed to proceed in the absence of the petitioner's counsel despite prior notice.
V. Shankaramma
V. Rama Chandra Reddy
V. Krishnamma
Nandhimalla Govindhamma
B. Ramulu
B. Balaswamy
M Laxman
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
