The High Court dismissed a City Civil Court Appeal for non-prosecution. The appellants did not appear despite a notice being sent, the court noting their counsel had filed a 'no objection' vakalat. Pending applications stand closed.
Appeal dismissed for non-prosecution; pending miscellaneous applications closed; no 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.
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OFTELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
WEDNESDAY, THE SIXTEENTH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY THREE
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SAMBASIVARAONAIDU
ctry ctvtl cou RT APPEAL NO: 453 OF2018
Appeal Under Section 96 Read with Order XL1Rule 1of C.P.C. against the Judgment and Decree dated 01-08-2018 madein O.S.No.547 of 2013 on the file of the Court of the Additional Judge-cum- Vl Senior CivilJudge, Hyderabad.
Between:
...Appellants (Defendant Nos. 4 &9)
AND
...Respondent Nos. 2 tp 10(Defendants Nos. 1 to3,5 to g, 10 and 11)
IANO:1OF2 018
Petition under order XL1 Rure 5 Read with section 151 of c.p.c praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High court may be preased to grant stay of ail further proceedings incruding passing of final decree in pursuance of judgment and decree dated 01-0g-2018 made and passed in o.s. No. 541 of 2o'13 on the file of the Learned Additional Judge-cum-vl senior civir Judge, c.c.c. at Hyderabad, pending disposar of the above appeal.
counsel for the Apperrants: sRr. A. SURYANARAYANA, Advocate, Given No Objection Vakalat to the Appellant, No Representation on behalf of the Appellant
Counsel for the Respondent Nos. 1 to g: SRl. A. K. NARASIMHA RAO
Counsel for the Respondent Nos. g&10: None Appeared
The Court made the following: JUDGMENT
THE HONOURABLESRI JUSTICE SAMBASIVA RAO NAIDU
c.c.c.A. N0.453 0F2()18
JUDGMENT:
None appeared forthe appellants though the matter was listed underthe caption 'fordismissal''Since Mr.A.Suryanarayana,learned counsel,who earlier representedthe appellants, has informedthis Court that he has given 'no objection vakalat'to the appellants,this Court directed notices to the appellants.However, there was norepresentationfor the appellants. Thus,it appears that the appellants are not interesting 1n prosecuting the mattervigilantlyand diligently any more' Therefore, thisappeal isliable to bedismissedfornon- prosecution.
prosecution.
Pending miscellaneous applications, ifanY, shall stand
closed. No costs.
Sd/. K.SRINIVASA RAO TRAR JOINT lEGls \7, //TRUECOPY// "x' SECTIONOFFICER
To,
HIGH COURT
SSRNJ
DATED:1 610812023
STAI€ cA.
t'
(
-1;
(:
[ 4 J[]i ?ii74
* oE$F
JUDGMENT
CCCA.No.453 of 2018
DISMISSING THE CITY CIVIL COURT APPEAL FOR NON.PROSECTUION WITHOUT COSTS.
e>
T. Mahesh
Smt. P. Prem Kumari
Smt. P. Satyavathi
Smt. P. Jaya Sudha
Smt. B. Lavanya
T. Pradeep Kumar
Sri Justice Sambasivarao Naidu
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
