The High Court of Telangana dismissed the Second Appeal filed by Alwanpally Ashanna against a civil decree for non-prosecution, noting the appellant did not appear on the scheduled date despite it being listed for dismissal.
The Second Appeal is dismissed for non-prosecution.
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.
[32581
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
MONDAY, THE THIRTY FIRST DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY THREE
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SAMBASIVARAO NAIDU
SECOND APPEAL NO: 118 OF 2017
Appeal under section 100 of C.P.C against the Judgment and Decree Dated 16.03.2016 made in A.S No. 77 of 2012 on the file of the Court of the Special Sessions Judge -cum- VII Addl. District and Sessions Judge, Mahabubnagar District Preffered against the Decree in O.S. NO.90 OF 2003 Dated 20-09-2012 on the file of the Court of the Principal Sessions Civil Judge, Mahaboobnagar
Between:
...APPELLANT/DEFENDANT NO.1 3
AND
Respondents NO.s 2 to 11 are not necessaryparties in this appeal
...RESPONDENTS
SAMP. NO: 270 OF 2017
Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of thepetition, the High Court may bepleased suspend thejudgment and decree dated 16.03.2016 in AS No.7712012passed by the learned Special Sessions Judge cum Vll Addl. District and Sessions Judge, Mahabubnagar District as against appellant's land of Ac.1 0-00 guntas in Survey No.40 pending dispsoal of the SA
Counsel for the Appellant : M/S. G SHASHIDHAR REDDY
Counsel for the Respondents: M/S. L HARISH
The Court delivered the following: JUDGMENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SAMBASIVA RAO NAIDU
SECOND APPEAL NO.118 OF 2OI7
JUDGMENT:
None appeared for the appellant, though the matter was listed today under the caption 'for dismissal'. On the face of the record, it depicts that this appeal was preferred in the year 2017, however, the appeal is not yet admitted, due to the absence of counsel. Thus, it appears that the appellant is not interested to prosecute the matter vigilantly and diligently anymore. Therefore, this appea-l is liable to be dismissed for non-prosecution.
Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand
closed. No costs.
SD/- T SRINIVAS DEPUW REGIS R
I
//TRUE COPY//
SECTION OFFICER
To, ,| The Special sessionsJud!6.-cum- vll Addl. District and sessionsJudge, MahabubnagarDistrict
ADK $$
HIGH COURT DATED:31 10712023
ORDER
SA.No.118 of 2017
1 $E STA I€
(
q
2023 oz
3 2g NOV
*
t o s P C 9O
DISMISSING THE SA FOR NON PROSECUTION
rS\
{
Alwanpally Ashanna
Kheda Narsimha Chary
K. Amruthamma
Kothakapu Narsimha Reddy
Swarupa Rani
Saritha
SAMBASIVARAO NAIDU
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
