Dismissed

Kade Ramesh Kumar and 2 others v. Peddapelli Vinoda

Telangana HC17 Oct 2025CRP/1277/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Single Judge of the Telangana High Court disposed of multiple C.R.Ps filed under Article 227 and Section 151 CPC. After hearing counsel, the Court dismissed the petitions as infructuous while granting liberty to move fresh petitions if the cause of action survives.

What did the court decide?

Petitions dismissed as infructuous; liberty granted to move fresh petitions if cause survives; no order as to costs.

Kade Ramesh Kumar and 2 others Vs… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Telangana HC (2025)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD

¶2

FRIDAY,THE SEVENTEENTH DAY OF OCTOBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENW FIVE

¶3

PRESENT

¶4

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NARSING RAO NANDIKONDA

¶5

C.R.P.No.1327 of 2021

¶6

Petition under Article 227 of the Gonstitution of lndia, against the Order made in l.A.No.8S of 2O21 in O.S.No.425 of 2013 dated 12.03.2021 on the file of the Principal Jr.Civil Judge Cum Judicial Magistrate of First Class, , Karimnagar.

¶7

C.R.P.No.1277 of 2021 :

¶8

Petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of lndia,.against the Order made in l.A.No.86 of 2021 in O.S.No.4N ot 2013 dated 12.03.2021 on the file of the Principal Jr.Civil Judge Cum Judiciat Magistrate of First Glass, Karimnagar.

¶9

l.A.No.l of 2021 in C.R.P.No.I277 of 2021 :

¶10

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 of all further in O.S.No.425 ot 2013 on the fib of Principal Jr.Civil Judge Cum Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Karimnagar. C.R.P.No.1323 of 2021 :

¶11

Petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of lndia, against the Order made in l.A.No.84 ot 2O21in O.S.No.425 ot 2013 dated 12.03.2021 on the file of the Principal Jr.Givil Judge Cum Judiciat Magistrate of First Class, Karimnagar.

¶12

COMMON C.T.lN ALL C.R.Ps:

¶13

Between

¶14

lGde Ramesh Kumar, S/o. Ramaiah, Age.28 Years, Occ.Busjness R/o H.No.8-1 424, Kattarampur locality Karimnagar Town.

¶15

Ragilla Laxman, S/o. Rajaram, Age. 32 Years, Occ. Business Rio H.No.8-1503, Kattarampur locality Karimnagar Town.

¶16

Masam Sheshu Kumar, S/o. Late Kanukaiah, Age.30^{Years,Occ.Business} R/o H.No 8-6-189, Kothirampur locality Karimnagar Town. ...PETITION ERS/PLAI NTIFFS

¶17

AND

¶18

PeddapelliVinoda, Wo. Surender KumarAged about 51 Years, Occ. House hold R/o^t{.No. 7-1.606 Manakammathota Locality Karimnagar Town.

¶19

Paka Astroka Vardhan, S/o. Rajaiah Aged about 47 Years, Occ.Business Manakondur Village and Mandal Karimnagar District.

¶20

... RESPONDENTS'DEFEN DANTS

¶21

Counsel for the Petitioners in all C.R.Ps : SRl. R MADHAVI LATHA

¶22

Counsel for the Respondents in atlG.R.Ps : NONE eFpglneO

¶23

THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWNG : COMMON ORDER

I i

.-i::,:.:1-rirr4r

TIIE IIOIT'BLE SRT UUSTICE NARSING REO NAIYDIKONDA

¶29

. t:..i....:,.,,

¶30

IVhen the rnatters for hearing, Iearned counsel for the pefitioners submits that ;";;ff"#;:

¶31

i: Rec-ordins the aforesaid submission of learned counsel for "'l the pedtioners, t,rese revision p"utio.r*' ":":: are dismissed as infructuous sranfing libertv ,:---":-:".:* y to the pefitioners to noove fresh petitions in case the cause survives. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶32

As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions pending if any, shatl

stand closed.

SD/.AHSGOWRISHANKAR

/TRUE COPY/

OFFICER

To,

The Princpal Jr.Civil Judge Cum Judicial of First Class, Karimnagar. 2. One CC to SriR.Madhavi Latha, Advocate (OPUC) 3. Two CD Copies Ks/ABK YY

HIGH^GOURT

DATED^:17n0|fl:025

STA
i 2sJrltzo2[

COTUMON^ORDER

CRP.No.1^{327 ,1277 AND 1323 OF 2021}

¶46

Dismissing^{the C.R.Ps as} lnfructuous. costs

¶47

ao*(d -&-'

Kade Ramesh Kumar and 2 others v. Peddapelli Vinoda

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kade Ramesh Kumar and 2 others v. Peddapelli Vinoda

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

R Sudhakar Rao Vs Sports Authority of Telangana State

Mirza Mohammed Hussain Baig Vs Mr. Mohammed Shujuddin

Mirza Mohammed Hussain Baig Vs Mr. Mohammed Shujuddin and 2 others

Raju Gaidankar Vs J.Narender

Smt. Sarika P. Kulkarni Vs Praveen Dilip Kulkarni

Raju Gaidankar and Another Vs J.Amboji and 3 Others