Dismissed

Midde Yellaiah v. Dr.N.Pulla Reddy

Telangana HC7 Jun 2023CRP/851/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court closed this Civil Revision Petition challenging a Notice of Sale. Counsel for the petitioner submitted that the underlying Execution Petition was closed by the lower court due to full satisfaction, rendering further orders unnecessary.

What did the court decide?

The Civil Revision Petition was closed as the underlying execution proceedings were terminated by the recording of full satisfaction.

Midde Yellaiah Vs Dr.N.Pulla Reddy — Execution and Attachment | Telangana HC (2023)

[³²¹⁵¹

HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA

¶5

WEDNESDAY,THE SEVENTH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY THREE

¶6

PRESENT

¶7

THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE G.RADHA RANI

¶8

CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO: 851 OF 2023

¶9

Petition under Sec. 1 15 of Civil Procedure Code of lndia, aggrieved by the Notice of Sale under Order XXI Rule 65 of C.P.C daled^-10-2022 as illegal and contrary to law including proceedings in E.P.No.68/2014 in O.S.No.1O8l2O1'l on the file of Principal Junior Civil Judge Court at Suryapet

¶10

Between:

¶11

Midde Yellaiah, S/o. late Veeraiah, aged about 72 years, Occ. Agriculture, Rl/o. Yerkaram Village, Surayapet Mandal, Suryapet Dist

¶12

...PEflilONER(S)

¶13

AND

¶14

Dr.N.Pulla Reddy, S/o Peddi Reddy, Aged about 83 Years, Rt/o Suryapet Town, Suryapet Mandal, Suryapet District.

¶15

...RESPONDENTS

¶16

lA NO: 1 oF 2023

¶17

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 stay all further proceedings pursuant to notice of Sale under Order XXI Rule 65 of C.P.C dated - in E.P.No.68/2014 in O.S.No.108/201^'l on the file of Principal Junior Civil Judge Court at Suryapet

¶18

Counsel for the Petitione(s):SRl. D RAMAKRISHNA

¶19

Counsel for the Respondents: ------

¶20

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶21

TIIE HONOURABLE DT..IUSTICE G. RADHA RANI CIYIL RBvISIO\ PETITION No.851 OF 2023

¶22

ORDER

¶23

This Civil Revision Pctition is filed by the petitioner to set asidc

¶24

the notice ol sale under Order XXI Rule 65 of Code of Civil Procedure^as illegal and contraq, to law inclLrding^proceedings in^E.P.No.68 ol^{2014 in} O.S.No.1Otl of 201I on tlrc filc of'the^{Principal Junior CivilJudgcCourtat} Suryapet

¶25

2-. Learned counsel for tlie petitioner submitted^{that the lixecutiorr}

¶26

Petition was closed and there^{was rro necessity of passing orders in this Civil} Revision Petition. Fle filed a copy^{of statusreportof the PrincipalJtrniorCivil} Judgc Court at Surlapet showing^{that the ExecutionPetition was tetminatctl} by recording the full satisfaction^tncmo.

¶27

Hencc, this Civil Revision Petition^{is closed.}

¶28

Miscellaneous Applications, if any^{pending, shall stand closed.}

¶29

Sd/.K.VENKAIAH //TRUE^COPY// ASSISTANT ci^REGISTRAR

¶30

SECTION^OFFICER

¶31

¶32

To, 1. The^{Prl. Junior CivilJudge Court at Suryapet'} ---... i. o"L cc io^{sRl. D RAM^KRISHNA Advocate[oPUC]} 3. Two CD^CoPies \ Y

il I

HIGH COURT

DATED:07/06/2023

CRP.No.851 of 2023

-i\i
,s o
J
C)r) I E llJL 2['n .:i
9
i) ./.
.,/
't. + ,.. -_ . -.-. --t. I
'--::,-... --#!!r ''-

¶39

GLOSED

¶40

Midde Yellaiah v. Dr.N.Pulla Reddy

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Midde Yellaiah v. Dr.N.Pulla Reddy

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

N.Ramesh Kumar Vs Bm.,Sbi.,Balanagar,Rr Dist and 2 Ors.

Mohd Bilal, Karimnagar Dist Vs Komatipelly Sudhakar, Karimnagar Dist and Anr.

Kondam Jayapal Reddy, Vs K.Ram Narahari

Jan Shah Vs P.Venkata Raoand Ors.

Bajaj Allianz Gen Ins Co. Ltd., Hyderabad Vs Munjala Mallesham, Warangal Dist and 2 Others

Smt v. Pochamma Vs Pentaiah