Dismissed¶31

Vunukonda Laxmi Prasanna, v. Vunukonda Veeresham

Telangana HC15 Oct 2025CRP/6915/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Telangana High Court, 15-10-2025, Justice Narsing Rao Nandikonda: Civil Revision Petition No.6915 of 2017 (defendant Vunukonda Laxmi Prasanna v. plaintiffs/respondents Vunukonda Veeresham and Vunukonda Kanakatara) dismissed as infructuous with no costs after the underlying suit O.S.No.27 of 2017 (Junior Civil Judge, Peddapally, Karimnagar District) was settled by Lok Adalat award dated 13.09.2022. Keywords: Article 227 Constitution of India; Order VII; Section 151 CPC stay petition (I.A.No.1 of 2017 / CRPMP No.8890 of 2017); I.A.No.253 of 2017; Lok Adalat settlement; infructuous revision; advocates Arun Kumar Doddla, Neelakanta Reddy, V. Ravi Kiran Rao.

What did the court decide?

Civil Revision Petition No.6915 of 2017 dismissed as infructuous; no order as to costs; miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. ¶31

Vunukonda Laxmi Prasanna, Vs Vunukonda Veeresham — Writ and Judicial Review | Telangana HC (2025)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR^{THE STATE OF TELANGANAAT HYDERABAD}

¶2

WEDNESDAY, THE FIFTEENTH DAY OF OCTOBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE

¶3

PRESENT

¶4

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NARSING RAO NANDIKONDA

¶5

CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO:6915 OF 2017

¶6

Petition under Article 227 ot the Constitution of lndia,^praying that in the circumstances stated in the grounds filed herein, the High Court may be^pleased to set-aside the Order made in l. A. No.253 of 2017 in O.S.No.27 of 2017, dated 07-11-2017, on the file of the Junior Civil Judge, Peddapally, Karimnagar^District.

¶7

Between

¶8

Vunukonda Laxmi Prasanna, Wo. Late Shanker, Aged 55 Years, Occ. Govt. Employee, R/o. H. No. 4-5-1411, Subhash Nagar, Peddapally Town and District. (Erstwhile Karimnagar District).

¶9

...Petitioner/Defendant

¶10

AND

¶11

Vunukonda Veeresham, S/o.Bhoomaiah, Aged 65 Years, Occ. Retd. Employee,

¶12

Vunukonda Kanakatara, Wo. Veeresham, Aged 60 Years, Ocr. House Wife,

¶13

Both Respondents are R/o. H. No.4-5-14, Subhash Nagar, Peddapally Town and District. (Erstwhile Karimnagar Diskict)

¶14

..,Respondents/Plaintiffs

¶15

l.A. NO: 1 OF 2017(CRPMP NO: 8890 OF 20171

¶16

Petition under Section 15'l CPC^praying that in the circumstances^stated in the affidavit filed in support of the^petition, the High.Court^{may be pleased to} grant stay of all fu(her proceedings in OS.No.27 ol 20'17 on the file of the Junior Civil J udge, Peddapally, Karimnagar District.

¶17

For the Petitioner : Sri Arun Kumar Doddla, Advocate

¶18

Forthe Respondents: Sri Neelakanta Reddy for V. Ravi Kiran^{Rao, Advocate}

¶19

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶20

,--)

¶21

THT HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE NARSING RAO NANDIKONDA

¶22

rrrtrryTq

¶23

'fhis civil Revision petition is frled against the order dated o7-Ll-2otr in I.A.No.2s3 of 2otz in o.s.No.2z of 2oLT passed by the learned Junior civil Judge, peddapalry, Karim:nagar District.

¶24

\ \

¶25

2 llone appeared for the petitioner/defendant.

¶26

It[r.Neelakanta Reddy, learned counsel representing Mr.v.Ravi Kira, Rao, rearned counsel for the respond.ents reported that the very Suit bearing o.s.No.2 z of 2or7 pending on thr: frle of rearned Junior civil Judge, peddapally, Karimnagar District was referred to the Lok Adalat and the same u'as settled and Award was passed on l3.og.2o 22 and, nothing: survives in the present civil Revision petition, whi,ch was filed assailing the order dated oz-Ll-2olr in I.A.No.2sg of 2017 in o.s-No.2z of 2017 passed by the learned Junior

11 t

c.nD.rb.Gsrsoi,,,l"

Civil Judge, peddapally, Karimnagar Distqict under Order VII

¶31

4' In view of the disposal of trre main suit, the very cause does not survive; as such the Civil Revision petition is dismissed as infructuous There shafl be no order as to costs

¶32

Miscellaneous petitions, pending if etny, shall stand closed.

¶33

//TRUE COPYII

¶34

Ass'3?lNBiHElSffH 6 SECNON OFFICER

¶35

¶36

To,

¶37

P^{i ffi E$F"f#tl}ffi*'fl3ffidf:::;isissirtr"}

¶38