Allowed

S.Srinivas Goud v. The Honourable Ap Cooperative Tribunal

Telangana HC23 Sept 2024WP/4417/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single-judge order reviewing an order dismissing a Writ Petition. The review was allowed on fresh grounds that the original Advocate shifted practice, causing lack of communication. The dismissal order was set aside and the writ petition restored.

What did the court decide?

Review petition allowed; dismissal orders dated 23.09.2024 set aside; Writ Petition No. 4417 of 2015 restored to file.

S.Srinivas Goud Vs The Honourable Ap… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Telangana HC (2024)

¶1

[³³⁰² ]

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE^{OF TELANGANA} AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶3

TUESDAY,THE SIXTEENTH DAY OF SEPTEIMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K. SARATH

¶6

tA NO. 2 0F 202s IN WRIT PETITION NO: 4417 OF 2015

¶7

Between:

¶8

S.srinivas Goud, S/o. Late S.Ramaiah Goud,^{aged about 52 years, OccAuto} Driver, r/o. H.No.8-56, Old lr/alkajgiri, Hyderabad

¶9

...PETITIONER

¶10

AND

¶11

The Honourable AP Cooperative^{Tribunal, Hyderabad, rep.by its Registrar.} 2. l,tlls. Dhanalakshmi Mutually^Aided Cooperative,^{Thinft SocietyLimrted, Office} at 16-1 1-4771819, Diisukhnagar, Hyderabad,^{represented by its Chief} Executive Officer.

¶12

...RESPONDENTS

¶13

Petition under Section 114 rlw Order 47 Rule¹ of^{CPC prayingthat in} the circumstances^{stated in the affidavit filed in supportof the petition, theHigh} Court may be^pleased to^{Reviewthe order Dated 23-09-2024 the order in WP} No 4417 of 2015

¶14

Counsel for the Petitioner: Ms.^{A. SUNITHA}

¶15

Counsel for the Respondent No.1: GP FOR COOPERATION

¶16

Counsel for the Respondent No.2: --

¶17

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶18

<br>

¶19

This petition is filed to Review the order dated 23.9.2024 passed in wp No.4417 of 2015

¶20

The writ Petition was dismisse d for default against the respondent No.2 in view of non-compliance of the order of this Court dated 13.04.2017.

¶21

Ms.Akula sunitha, learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the Advocate on record has shifted his practice to htigh court of Andhra Pradesh and in view of the same there was no commtrnication between the petitioner and the Advocate on record and therefore the petitioner coutd not take any steps to set aside the dismissat order dated 23.09.2024 passed in W.P.No.4417 of 2015.

¶22

The learned counsel for the petitioner would furth<tr submit that, in view of dismissal of w.P.No.441T of 2o1s, the property documents pertaining to the petitioner were held up with the respondent No.2 and requesied to reiiew the orders passed by this court on 23.09.2024 and restore the writ petition on its file, enabling the petitioner to issue nofices to the responrlent No.z.

¶23

Having regard to the facts and circumstances of fhe case and on perusing the record, this l.A is allowed and the dismis:;at orders passed by this court on 23.09.2024 in wp No.441T of 201s is set aside and the writ petition is restored on its file.

¶24

l.A. is ordered accordingly.

¶25

//TRUE COPY//

¶26

SD/- M. OSMAN ALI BAIG .ASSISTANT REGISTRAR tli^' sEcroN oFFrcER

¶27

To, 1. The Re-gistrar. Honourable, T.S. Cooperative TribuHat liyrJg1s636, 2. One CC to lr,1s. A. SUNITHA, Advocate l,OpUCl 3. Two CCs to GP FOR COOPERATTON ,iliqh C6urt for he State of Telangana at Hyderabad [OUT] 4 Two CD Copies Bt/ GJP

HIGH COURT

DATED:1610912025

ORDER

tA NO. 2 0F 2025 IN

t# s tA
'(
) i 1 [iI ?16 S)
I -l,i
L
<br>i: lt' . .i-' '

¶33

WRIT PETITION NO: 4417 OF 2015

¶34

IA IS ALLOWED AND WRIT PETITION IS RESTORED TO ITS FILE

¶35

,\ )<br><br>{

S.Srinivas Goud v. The Honourable Ap Cooperative Tribunal

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

S.Srinivas Goud v. The Honourable Ap Cooperative Tribunal

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

M/s The Waddera Labour Contract Society Limited Vs Telangana State Dairy Development Cooperative

M/s. Bhargavi Gas Agencies, Vs The Chief Rationing Officer

Gatadi Gundu Gangadhar Vs The State of Telangana

Telangana Agricultural Officers Association Vs State of Telangana

Hindustan Aeronautics Employees Cooperative Housing Vs M/s. G. Uma Devi

Meka Venkata Babu Rao Vs State of Telangana