This appeal was dismissed for non-prosecution as the appellant failed to appear before the court despite being ordered to list the matter for hearing.
Second Appeal No. 204 of 2017 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.
[32s81
IN THE HIGH CO-URT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA .:, AT HYDERABAD
WEDNESDAY ,THE NINTH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY THREE
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SAMBASIVARAO NAIDU
SECOND APPEAL NO: 204 OF 2017
Appeal under Section 100 of CPC against Judgment and Decree dated 01.03.2016 passed in AS.No.SO of 2013 on the file of the Court of the Principal District Judge, t\4edak at Sangareddy, preferred against the Judgment and Decree dated 03.06.20'1 3 in O.S.No.303 of 2009 on the file of the Court of the Principal Junior Civil Judge, Sangareddy.
Between:
D. Sanjeevaiah, S/o. Mallaiah, aged about 41 years, Occ. A.R. Constable, Police Headquarters Sangareddy Town, R/o.Kalabgoor Village Sangareddy Mandal, Medak District.
...AppellanUPetitioner/Defendant
AND
Resp orrdents/Respondents.
l.A. NO: 3 OF 20 us AMP. NO: 493OF 2017
Petition trrrder Srldlion 151 CPC praying that in tl-e circrnlsturnces stated in the affidavit filed in sulrp rrt of the petition, the High court may be pleased to suspend the operation of the De ;r()e and Judgment dated 01.03.2016 6 ar;serl by the principal District Judge, Ir,4erja . ;rt Sangareddy in Appeal Suit No. 5C of ,2 )13, pending disposal of main second .rppe rl and to pass
Counsel for the App rllant:SRl. BETHT VENKATESWARLU (llc,t present)
Counsel for Respon ients 2 & 3 : SRI MEHER CHAND NORI
Counsel for Respon lents 4 to 6 : Sri J. SESHAGIRI RAO
The Court made the following: JUDGMENT
TIIE HONOURABLE SRI JT'STICE SAMEASIVA RAO NAIDU
SECOND APPEAL NO.2O4 OF 2OI7
JUDGMENT:
When this appeal is taken up for hearing on behalf of the appellant, there was no representation for the appellant. In view of the representation made by learned counsel for the appellant yesterday i.e., on 08.08.2023, this appeal was ordered to be listed today. Though the matteris passed over till 11.40 A.M., none appeared for the appellant. Thus, it appears that the appellant has no interestto J prosecute the matter vigilantly and diligently any more. Therefore, this appeal is liable to be dismissed for nonprosecution.
Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand
closed. No costs.
\
To,
//TRUE COPY//
Sd/- B.S.CHIRANJEEVI JorNr REGtgfRAR / SECTION OFFICER
Jsk "/
HIGH COURT
DATED:09/08/20 23
JUDGMENT
SA.No.204 ot 201'l
, -:-
., .---..
":
,1:.
/;,.' a'i.:.
t' ,,
{:; 1 1 Atlt] 2$a
'''i ! . '') .-,1'
SECOND APPE,AL I ; I)ISMISSED FOR NON-PROf;EC JTION
rr)<br>L
D. Sanjeevaiah
1. N. Mogulaiah
G.Yogula Kumar
G. Sampath Kumar
Ch Madhavi
Chennagalla Muralidhar
Sri Justice Sambasivarao Naidu
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
