Dismissed¶30

V.Visalakshi v. Amidala Rajani

Telangana HC6 Jan 2026CRP/2569/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Telangana High Court, CRP.No.2569 of 2019, decided 06-01-2026 by Narsing Rao Nandikonda, J. Revision petition under Article 227 against order dated 14.08.2019 in IA No.220 of 2019 in OS No.2014 of 2017 (10th Junior Civil Judge, City Civil Courts, Hyderabad). Dismissed as infructuous on counsel's submission that the cause did not survive; no order as to costs; S.151 CPC stay petition (IA No.1 of 2019) noted; no case law cited, no quantum involved.

What did the court decide?

Recording the submission of learned counsel for the petitioners that the cause in the revision petition does not survive for further adjudication and has become infructuous, the High Court dismissed the Civil Revision Petition as infructuous, with no order as to costs. ¶30

V.Visalakshi Vs Amidala Rajani — Writ and Judicial Review | Telangana HC (2026)

¶1

|³⁴⁴³¹

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD

¶3

TUESDAY, THE SIXTH DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NARSING RAO NANDIKONDA

¶6

CIViL REVISION PETITION NO: 2569 OF 2019

¶7

Petition under Article 227 of lhe Constitution of lndia, aggrieved by the order dated 14.O8.2019 in lA No.220 of 2019 in OS No.^2O14 of 2017^{on the file of} the Court of the 1Oth Junior Civil Judge, City Civil Courts,^{at Hyderabad.}

¶8

Between:

¶9

V.Visalakshi, W/o Late V.V.Subramanyam, aged about 60^{years, Occ:} Household, ilo 12-13-70517 & 8, Flat No.405, SS^{Heights, Nagarjuna Nagar,} Tarnaka, Secunderabad^-50001 7, Telangana.

¶10

V.V.Nagaraju, S/o Late V-B.Kumaraswamy, aged about^{49 years, occ: Private} Service, R/o 10-5-79'l/3/8, Sai Nagar, North Lallaguda,^{Hyderabad-SOOO17.}

¶11

V.V.Sidhartha, S/o Late V.V.Subramanyam, aged about 24^{years, occ.} Student, No 12-13-70517 & 8, Flat No.405, SS^{Heights, Nagarjuna Nagar,} Tarnaka, Secunde rabad-50001 7, Telangana.

¶12

REVISION PETITIONERS/ PETITIONERS/PLAINTIFFS

¶13

AND

¶14

Amidala Rajani, d/o Late S.Ratnamma, aged about^{54 years, occ: t-lgqsetpf} !, R/o 2-2-1i6711013A, Tilaknagar, Bagh Amberpet,^{Hyderabad-500o44,} Telangana.

¶15

RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT/DEFENDANT

¶16

lA NO: 1 OF 2019

¶17

Petition under Section 151 CPC^praying that in the circumstances^statedin the affidavit filed in support of the^petition, the High^{Courtmay be pleasedto stay} atl further^proceedings in OS No.2014 of^{2017 on the file of the Hon'ble1Oth} Junior Civil Judge, City Civil Courts,^at Hyderabad.

¶18

Counsel for the Petitioners: Sri. P S Rajasekhar

¶19

Counsel for the Respondent: Sri. T^Sanjay Rao

¶20

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶21

IN THE IIIGH COURT^{FOR THE STATE OF TE],\NGANA} AT HYDERABAD

¶22

THE HON'BLE SRI^{JUSTICENARSINGRAO NA]{ )IKONDA}

¶23

DATE: 06.01.2o26

¶24

CTVIL REVISION PETITI^{oN NO.2569 0F12 )19}

¶25

Between:

¶26

V.Visalakshi W/ o late^{V.V.Subramanyam} Pe'i ioners And others. And Amidala Raj ani D/o late S.Ratnamma. ... Res ronclent

¶27

ORDER

¶28

karned counsel attached^{to the officeof}

¶29

Sri P.S.Rajasekhar, learnecl^{counselfor thepetitioners,} submits that the cause in the^{revisionpetil i I rdoes not} survive for further adjudication and^it l.t ts become infructuous.

¶30

Recording the said submission, the^{r- r'il Revision} Petition is dismissed as infructuous.^{There shz I be no order} as to costs.

¶31

Miscellaneous petitions, if any,^{pending shallstand}

¶32

closed.

¶33

. IANDRA SEKHAR :^)UTY REGISTRAR // //TRUE COPYII ;ECTION OFFICER \

¶34

¶35

¶36

1 The 1Oth Junior Civil Judge, City Civil Courts, at Hydera ;ad 2 One CC to Sn. P S Rajasekhar, Advocate [OPUC] One CC to Sri. T Sanjay Rao, Advocate [OPUCI Two CD Copies N:i:

.=:1l#

)

HIGH COURT

DATED: 0610112026

6Zi \ E SIAi c
g rtB ?0
i\c
*
\ I
l.'Fs
--=.-

¶42

ORDER