Telangana High Court
CRP/829/2015 of CHEBROLU CHALAPATHI, KHAMMAM DIST Vs SAKHAMURI SUGUNA, KHAMMAM DIST on 30 December 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO: 829 OF 2015 Petition under seclion 227 of the Constitution of lndia, against by the Order dated 20.06.20'1 '1 made in l.A.No.88/2010 in O.S.No.992/2006 on the file of the Prrncipal Junior Civil Judge, Khammam.
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANAAT HYDERABAD
FRIDAY THE THIRTIETH DAY OF [DECEI\,,,IBER]TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY TWO
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE A.VENKATESHWARA [REDDY]
CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO: [829 ]OF 2015
Petition under seclion 227 of the Constitution [of ][lndia, ][against ][by the ][Order]dated 20.06.20'1 ['1 ]made in l.A.No.88/2010 [in O.S.No.992/2006 on the ][file ][of ][the]Prrncipal Junior Civil Judge, [Khammam.]
Between:
CHEBROLU CHALAPATHI, S/o [Venkaiah, ]aged [60 years, Occ: Agriculture, ][R/O]H.No.4-19, V. Venkatayapalem, Khammam [Urban Mandal, Khammam district.]
...PETITIONER/PETITION ERYDEFENDANT
AND
SAKHAMURI SUGUNA, WO [Venkata Satyanarayana, aged ][40 ][years, ][Occ:]household and agriculture, R/O [4-40, V. Venkatayapalem, Khammam ][Urban]Mandal, Khammam district.
...RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT/PLAINTIFF
CRP.M.P. No. 1089 of 2015
Petition under Section 151 of CPC [Praying that in the circumstances stated in ][the]affidavit filed therewith, the High Court [may ][be ][pleased ][to ][grant stay of all further]proceedings in O.S. HNo. 992of 2006, on the file of the Principal Junior [Civil Judge,]Khammam Counsel for the Petitioners: M/s. [MEHERCHAND ][NORI]
Counsel for the Respondent No.1: Mr. KOWTURU [PAVAN KUMAR]
The Court made the following:
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE A.VENKATESHWARA REDDYCIVIL REVISIO N PETITION NO.829 OF 2OL5
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORDER:
None appears on behalf of the revision petitioner. Learnedcounsel on behalf of the respondent present and submitted thatthe suit has been decreed long back itself. Verilied the casestatus information. Wherein it is reflected that original suit inO.S.No.992 ol 2006 was decreed with costs on 15. 11.2017, rhisCivil Revision Petition is filed assailing the orders dated20.06.20l I in I-A.No.88 of 2Ot0 in O.S.No.992 of 2006.
2. Therefore, in view of the disposal of the original suit asstated above no cause survives, this Civil Revision petition isstated above no cause survives, this Civil Revision petition isdismissed as infructuous. In the circumstances of the case,there shall be no order as to the costs. Miscellaneousthere shall be no order as to the costs. Miscellaneousapplications, if any pending, shall stands closed.
Sd/. T. JAYASREEASSISTANT REGISTRAR,..111r\ 'SECTION OFFICER
//TRUE COPY//
To,
'1. The Principal Junior Civil Judge at Khammam, Khammam District'
2. One CC to Sri MEHERCHAND [NORI, Advocate ][OPUC]
3. One CC to Sri KOWTURU [PAVAN KUMAR, Advocate ][OPUC]
4. Two CD Copies
't^.<
HIGH COURT
D ArED:3011212022
ORDER
CRP.No.829 of 2015
DISMISSING THE C.R.P AS INFRUCTUOUS
\?[\".]$u-
C1/\lc25JAil 2023itl\