Dismissed

Naziruddin Ahmed v. D. Janardhan

Telangana HC23 Mar 2023CCCA/111/2004

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this City Civil Court Appeal, the High Court of Telangana dismissed the appeal for default under Section 96 of CPC for non-prosecution, noting the matter had been pending for two decades, and directed closure of miscellaneous applications without costs.

What did the court decide?

Appeal dismissed for default for non-prosecution. No order as to costs. Miscellaneous applications closed.

Naziruddin Ahmed Vs D. Janardhan — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Telangana HC (2023)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE^{OF TELANGANA} AT HYDERABAD

¶2

THURSDAY THE IWENTY THIRD DAY^{OF MARCH} TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY THREE

¶3

PRESENT

¶4

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE A.VENKATESHWARA REDDY

¶5

CITY CIVIL COURT APPEAL NO:111 OF 2OO4

¶6

Appeal Under Section 96 of C.P.C. aggrieved by the Judgment and Decree at 31-03-2004 in O.S. No. 97 ot 2001 on the file of the Court of the Xl Additional Chief Judge (FTC), City Civil Court at Hyderabad.

¶7

Between:

¶8

1 . Naziruddrn Ahmed, S/o Late Nazimuddln Architect R/o 3-5-145, Vittalwadi, Narayanaguda, Hyderabad.

¶9

2 Riazuddin Ahmed, S/o Late Nazimuddin Architect R/o 3-5-145, Vittalwadr, Narayanaguda, Hyderabad.

¶10

Abdul Khader Mohiuddin Ahmed, S/o Late Nazimuddin Ahmed Business R/o 3-5145, Vittalwadi, Narayanaguda, Hyderabad.

¶11

... Plaintiffs ( 1 to 3 ) / Appellants

¶12

AND

¶13

1 . D .ianardhan. S/c Venkaiah Pan shop 3-5-145 (old), 3-5-1 15 (New) NarayanaguCa, Hyderabad.

¶14

2, Yousufuddin Ahmed S/o Late Nazimuddin Ahmed Eusiness R/o 3-5-145, Vittalwadi, Narayanaguda, Hyderabad.

¶15

( R -2 is not necessary party to this appeal )

¶16

... DEFENDANT / PLAINTIFF NO. 4 / Respondents

¶17

CMP. NO: 10132OF 2OO4

¶18

Petition under Sectidn 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petitron, the High Court may be pleased To suspend the operation of the Decree and Judgment dated 31 .03.2OO4 passed in O.S.NO 9712001 on the file of the Xl Addl. Chief Judge (FTC), City Civil Court, Hyderabad pending disposal of the Appeal.

¶19

Counsel for the Appellant: SRl. SRINIVAS CHOWDARY ( not present )

¶20

Counsel for the Respondent: SRI P. PANDURANGA RAO

¶21

The Court delivered the following: Judgment

¶22

$ Il II

¶23

I I

¶24

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE A.VENKATESHWARA REDDY CITY CIVIL COURT APPEAL No. 1 tI oF 200,4

¶25

JUDGMENT:

¶26

Nonc appears orr bt_lr:tll- of the appellants. perusecl the proceedings da tecl 1.5.03.2 02.1 On that day also thcre ivas no reprcsentatio. lrn bclr:rlf ol airpcllants. As such, the matter was directed to be listecl urtrler rhc caption .for dismissal, only to drarv the atrention o[ the lc:rrrred counsel for the appellants. But therc is no rc pre scn Iil liol1 even today Therefore, considering thc lact rhal thr: lirst appeal is pending since last two decades, I lind no nten I lo adjourn the matter in the absence ofproper representarion. Accordingly, this Appeal Suit is dismissed lbr. r:lefaulr lbr n <;l _prosecution However, in the circumstances of Lhc c:rsc, there shall be no orders as to the costs. As a sequel. miscellaneorrs applications, if any pending, shall stands closcd

¶27

¶28

//TRUE COPYII

¶29

Sd/. K. SRINIVASA RAO JOINT REGISTRAR

SECTION OFFICER

l: IH l'i#Ef;t i F,iJiJiStTJil&- gity Civil Court at Hyderabad , Advocate [OPUC] 3. One CC to SRt. p. PANDURANGA RAO, Advocate [OPUC] 4. Two CD Copies

HIGH COURT

DATED:2310312023

JUDGMENT

CGCA.No.111 ot 2004

, jrlE S 1..1; fr'
(
.) 1
I i :)
I {)
I 0 7 ,tljt.20n
t 'i.',r:'
. ..r-
':i.

¶40

DISMISSING THE CCCA FOR DIlF.AUI-T FOR

¶41

NON PROSECUTION WITIIOUI- ('OSTS

¶42

6
t-
? ' gc,kl
'r ,

Naziruddin Ahmed v. D. Janardhan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Naziruddin Ahmed v. D. Janardhan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

M/S. Rama Krishna Constructions, Hyderabad. Vs Union of India, Secunderabad. and 2 Others

The State Trading Corporation of the India Limited Vs M/S. Vikas Trading Company and Anr.

Prashanth Manohar Vs Smt.Ch.Sulochana

Mohd. Abdul Qavi Vs Battula Chittari

Sri. Rama Pushpaneela Vs Chinthireddy Kondananda Ram Reddy

Smt. Suvarna and 2 others Vs K. Venkatesh and 4 others