Dismissed

Masjid Managing Committee v. Ahmed Sharif (Since Deceased per LRs)

Telangana HC7 Nov 2023SA/356/2004

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Second Appeal No.356 of 2004 was dismissed because the appellant, who filed a suit for recovery of vacant possession, failed to pursue the litigation after notice was sent. The court held that continuing the appeal would serve no purpose.

What did the court decide?

The Second Appeal is dismissed without costs and pending miscellaneous applications are closed.

Masjid Managing Committee Vs Ahmed Sharif… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Telangana HC (2023)

¶1

i fII I

¶2

t I I t I !

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYOERABAD

¶4

TUESDAY, THE SEVENTH DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY THREE

¶5

PRESENT

¶6

THE HON'BLE SMT JUSTICE P.SREE SUDHA

¶7

SECOND APPEAL No: 356 of 2OO4

¶8

Appeal urider Section 100 of C.P.C against the Judgment and Decree^Dated 13-10-2003 made in A.S.No.110 of 2001 on the file of the Court of^{the I Additional} Chief Judge, City Civil Court, Secunderabad Preferred against the^Judgmentand Decree dated O744-2OO1^passed in O.S.No.399 of^{1997 on} the^{file of the Court of} the I Junior Civil Judge, City Civil Court, Secunderabad. Between:

¶9

Masjid Managing Committee, New Bhogiuda, Secunderabad.^Rep.byits Secietary Moh-d. Hashim / Shri Basheer Khan^{presentlyby HabeebUr Rahman} .,,^{Rl/o.NewBhoiguda,Secunderabad. ...AppellanURespondenUPlaintiff}

¶10

AND

¶11

Ahmed Sharif^(Since Deceased^{per LRs)}

¶12

1l'r2. Smt. Bee Pasha, D/o.Late Ahmed Sharif, aged 54 years,

¶13

Moahamood Sharif, S/o.Late Ahmed^{Sharif, aged 25 years,}

¶14

Madboob sharif, S/o.Late Ahmed Sharif,^{aged 24 years,}

¶15

Sharif, S/o.Late Mohd. Shareef, aged^{23 years,}

¶16

Respondents 3 to 5 are dismissed for default fot^5-1-20'12

¶17

All residents are Ryo. H.No. 6-1-356^{Near Rail Kalarang,New Bhoiguda,} Secunderabad.

¶18

A.P.State Wakf Board rep. by its Chief Executive^{Otficer,Haj HouseBuilding,} Opp: Public Gardens Nampally, Hyderabad.

¶19

lmpleaded as 2d Respondent vide Court^Order dated^{1O-12-2OO4 in} C.M.P.No.11484of04. ...Respondents/Appplnts/Defendants

¶20

counsel for tle Appellant: sRl^R. CHANDRA^{SHEKAR REDDY}

¶21

Counsel for tha Respondents: None^ApPeared

¶22

The Court delivered the following: JUDGMENT

¶23

I I

¶24

THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE P. SREE SUDHA

¶25

SECON D APPEAL NO.356 oF 2004

¶26

JUDGMENT:

¶27

Plaintiff filed O.S.No.399 of L997 on the file of lsJunior Civil Judge, City Civil Court, Secunderabad, for recovery of vacant possession. The trial Court decreed the suit. The unsuccessful defendants preferred appeal vide A.S.No.110 of 2001 wherein the appellate Court had allowed the appeal, against which the second appeal has been filed.

¶28

Learned counsel for appellant is no more and notice sent to the appellant but it is not yet returned. But notice sent to the same address in another case was served upon the appellant. Hence, it cannot be said that the appellant has no knowledge about the case. As he did not evince any interest in pursuing the litigation, no purpose would be served in continuing the second appeal.

¶29

Accordingly, the Second Appeal is dismissed. No order as to

¶30

costs

¶31

Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed.

¶32

sD/-K.SAr HI DEPUW REGIST R //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER To, 1. The I Additional chief Judge, city civir court, Secunderabad. (with records) 2. The t^J^unior Civit Judge, City Civil Court, Sec-unAeiaUJ. 1*it i"*rU.y^--' 3. One CC to SRt R. CHANDRA SHEKAR REDDY, nAvocate tOpUCl 4- Two CD Copies

NSka 'kr*

; I

tt'Ii I,i i t II i

tI If

i i Lt F I

HIGH COURT

it{ DATED: 0711112023

JUDGMENT

rSA.No.356 of 2004

<br>-r vlI s rATE o..
(
v
o
o $ 2 tEB 2[2t
i'
*-. .::.::i-)

¶46

¶47

L i

¶48

, Ii THE SECOND APPEAL !S DISMISSED. WITHOUT COSTS

¶49

i;i. .! :.i

¶50

¶51

i + -.+

Masjid Managing Committee v. Ahmed Sharif (Since Deceased per LRs)

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Masjid Managing Committee v. Ahmed Sharif (Since Deceased per LRs)

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

Challa Hanumanthu Vs Bathula Veera Babu

The Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs Elpula Butchalu and 3 Ors.

The Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs Mastry G Narayana Swamy and Another

Sangam Jagan Vs Mohd Moizulhaq and Anr.

The Oriental Insurance Company Ltd., Vs Maraboina , Gudese Veeraiah

Talla Narasimha Goud Vs S.Ravi Kumar