Dismissed

Vinjamoor Amaravathi v. M/s Siru Developers and another

Telangana HC14 Feb 2023CRP/1775/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Telangana permitted the withdrawal of three Civil Revision petitions filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. The petitions were consequently dismissed as withdrawn, and pending miscellaneous applications were closed.

What did the court decide?

Permission granted to withdraw the civil revision petitions; petitions dismissed as withdrawn.

Vinjamoor Amaravathi Vs M/s Siru Developers… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Telangana HC (2023)

¶1

[³²⁶⁰¹

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD

¶3

TUESDAY, THE FOURTEENTH DAY^{OF FEBRUARY} TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY THREE

¶4

ENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE A. SANTHOSH REDDY

177 1.782 AND 1 OF

CIVIL REVISION P

NO: {775 OF 2022

Petitions under Article 227 of Constitution of lndia aggrieved by the Order dated7.7.2022 in |.A.NO. 519 ot 2022 in O.S.NO. 605 of 2009 on the file of the Xl Addl. District and Sessions Judge, R.R District

¶10

Vinjamoor Amaravathi, W/o Mttal Reddy Aged about 50^{years.Occ.house} wife Rl/o Flat No. 102, plot No 24, 8-7-1311 Siru enclave shirdi sainagar, Hasthinapuram Central, sagar road, Saroor nagar Mandal, Ranga reddy district

¶11

Til

¶12

M/s Siru Developers, rep by its Proprietor Dr.D.Sudhakara Babu S/o D.Krishna Aged 60^years occ. doctor Rl/o 8-77, New Dilsukhnagar,Hyderabad

¶13

T.Srinvasa, S/o Shekaram Aged about 47 years Occ. business Rl/o Flat No. 301 , Sai Priya Residency Balaji nagar, Mohan nagar, Kothapet Hyderabad

¶14

Petition under Article 227 of Constitution of lndia, aggrieved by the Order and Decree dated 7.7.2022 passed in l.A.No. 741 of 2022in O.S.No.606 of 2009 on the file of Xl Addl. District and Sessions Judge,^R.R District

¶15

Between:

¶16

Smt. Manchireddy Vajramani, Wo M.Ramakrishna^{reddyaged about53 years} Occ. service Rl/o Flat No. 101,^plot No 24,^{8-7-1311Siru enclave shirdisainagar,} Hasthinapuram Central, sagar road, Saroor nagar^{Mandal, Ranga reddydistrict}

¶17

...PETITIONER/PETITIONER

¶18

AND

¶19

M/s Siru Developers, rep by its Proprietor Dr.D.Sudhakara Babu S/o D.Krishna Aged 60 years occ. doctor Fi/o 8-77, New Dilsukhnagar, Hyderabad

¶20

G.Venkata laxminarayana, S/o Murali Aged about 46 years Occ. Business Rl/o Flat 101 . sai priya re5idency Balaji nagai, Mohan nagir, Kothapet Hyderabad.

¶21

Gopathi Sharad Kumar, S/o Bikshapathi Aged about major Occ. business Rl/o '11-12-801103, Spring orchid royal home RK puram, Saroornagar, Hyderabad.

¶22

...RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS

¶23

lA NO: 'l OF 2022

¶24

Petition under Section^'t51 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to grant stay of all further proceedings in OS No. 606/2009 on the file of Xl Addl District and Sessions^judge at Ranga Reddy CIVIL REVISION P ON NO: 1784 OF 2022

¶25

Petition under Afticle 227 of Constitution of lndia aggrieved by the Order and Decree dated 7 .7 .2022 passed in LA. NO.s 1 8 ot 2022 in d.-S.t |O.OO5 of 2009 on the file of the lX Addl. District and Sessions Judge, R.R District.

¶26

Between:

¶27

Vinjamoor Amaravathi, Wo Vittal Reddy Aged about 50 years Occ. house wife Fl/o Flat No. 102, plot No 24, 8-7-1311 Siru enclave shirdi sainagar, Hasthinapuram Central, sagar road, Saroor nagar Mandal, Ranga reddy district

¶28

...PETITIONER/PETlTIONER

¶29

AND

¶30

M/s Siru Developers, rep by its Proprietor Dr.D.Sudhakara Babu S/o D.Krishna Aged 60 years occ. doctor Ri/o 8-77, New Dilsukhnagar, Hyderabad

¶31

T.Srinvasa, S/o Shekaram Aged about 47 years Occ. business Rl/o Flat NO. 301, Sai Priya Residency Balaji nagar, Mohan nagar, Kothapet Hyderabad

¶32

...RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS

¶33

OF m

¶34

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to grant stay of all further proceedings in OS No. 605/2009 pending disposal of the main CRP on the file Xl Addl Dist and Sessions judge L.B. Nagar Ranga Reddy Dist Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI G. CHAN DRASEKHAR Counsel for the Respondent No.2: SRI BETHI VENKATESHWARLU Counsel for the Respondent No.1: None appeared The Court made the following: COMMON ORDER

¶35

i':

¶36

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE A.SANTHOSH REDDY

¶37

CTVIL N PETITION N L775, l7g2 AND L784 oF 2022

¶38

COMMON ORDER:

¶39

Learned counsel for the petitioner seeks

¶40

permission of this court to withdraw the civil Revision

¶41

Petitions.

¶42

Permission is accorded.

¶43

Accordingly, these civit Revision petitions are

¶44

dismissed as withdrawn. pending miscellaneous

¶45

applications, if any, shall stand closed. No costs.

¶46

SD/. A.V.S PRASAD ASSISTANT REGISTRAR //TRUH COPYII q SECTION OFFICER

¶47

To,

¶48

The Xl Additional District and Sessions Judge, R.R District. 2. One CC to S!l-c. CHANDRASEKHAR REDDY Advocate tOpUCI

¶49

One CC to SRI BETHIVENKAT'ESHWARLU Advocate IOPUCI 4. Two CD Copies

KKS B$8.

HIGH COURT

DATED i1410212023

r,."r' ;j.:i J.
r:
e.J ,,.' i<br>e!
r'., l
t
l,; t-.:r-'
r l_._
C:. ) dr
'l
<':
(.:I . . 4.'<br>-!,'

¶56

COMMON ORDER

¶57

CRP.No.1775, 1782 & 1784 of 2022

¶58

DISMISSING OF THE CRP AS WITHDRAWN

¶59

A -vrffiV

Vinjamoor Amaravathi v. M/s Siru Developers and another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vinjamoor Amaravathi v. M/s Siru Developers and another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Prakash Sadre Vs M/s Margadarsi Chit Fund Pvt. Ltd.

P. Ramana Vs M/S Margadarshi Chit Fund Pvt. Ltd., and 4 Others

Paladugula Satyavathi since died and 4 Others Vs Belli Babu Rao

Vinjamoor Amaravathi Vs M/s Siru Develoopersand another

Smt. Manchireddy Vajramani Vs M/s Siru Develoopers and 2 Others

N. Muralidhar Rao Vs Nacharam Balaiah