The High Court of Telangana dismissed a Civil Miscellaneous Appeal for non-prosecution, noting the absence of appellant representation despite earlier directions to list for dismissal.
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.
[32s3 ]
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
TUESDAY, THE TWENTY FIRST TWOTHOUSANDAND TWENTYTHRE' DAY OF NOVEMBER__'
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE M.G.PRIYADARSINI
CIVIL MISC ELLANEOU S APPEAL NO: 569 OF 2012
Appear Under section 23 0f Rairways Act., aggrieved by the order dated 6- 5-2010 in M.A.No.e of 201.0 in , (U) r.rt.so7)ioddon the fire of th; R;iil;y Claims Tribunal, SecunderabaO Oenin, S"""nO"lrUro.
Between:
ftlj,.#:, ;:Sll;i"of chintha Gunta viilageand post,Ataharavi Mandat,
...APPELLANTS
AND
Represented by its Generat Manaser south centrat Raitway, ]::Jr:HS:lldia,
...RESPONDENT
Counsel for the Appeltants: SRt. V NARAYANA REDDy (None appeared) Counsel for the Respondent: SRI K MANI DEEPIKA
The Court made the following: JUDGMENT
THE HON'BLE SMT JUSTICE M.G. PRIYADARSINI
CTVIL MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL No. 569OF 2Ol2
JUDGMENT:
In spite of giving fair opportunities, as there was no representation for the appellants on theearlier occasion,the matter, which pertains to theyear 2072,was directed tobe listed today under the caption'For Dismissal'.Even today,there is no representation for the appellants. Itis presumed that the appellants are not interested toproceed with the appeal.
Hence, the Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is dismissed for non-prosecution. No order as to costs.
Miscellaneous applications, if any, pending shall stand
closed.
/ffRUECOPY//
sD/-K.s[+tEt?+mR Y
SECTIONOFFICER
To, 1 TheRailway Claims Tribunal Secunderabad Bench'at Secunderabad' (With 2 m:S[TIl.v NARAYANA REDDY' Advocate.[oPuc] 3 3H AiI;Hi. K irinr'rrorrprxn' Advocate [oPUc] 4. TwoCD CoPies
pr \ )."-
HIGH COURT
MGP, J
DATED: 2111112023
JUDGMENT CMA.No.569 of 2012
gTAl-E g
-l
r I\\ $1\ i
oftr t s'
o
+
i c'.'
O ESI'|,
DISMISSING THE CMA FOR NON-PROSECUTION
x.#
Kuruva Gangamma
Kuruva Mukkanna
Kuruva Gadilinga
Kuruva Naga Raju
South Central Railway, Hyderabad
M.G.PRIYADARSINI
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
