CMA/35/2022 of VILLURI REDDEMMA NAIDU Vs VILLURI RAMU on 6 October 2026

1. VILLURI REDDEMMA NAIDU, S/o. late Raghava Jagannadham Naidu, Hindu, Aged 56 years, Cultivation, Residing at D. No. 18-10-11/2, V.J. Naidu Street,Gavarapalem, Anakapalle, Visakhapatnam District.

2. Villuri Mahalakshmi Naidu,, S/o. late Raghava Jagannadham Naidu, Hindu,Aged 48 years, Cultivation, Residing at D. No. 18-

V.J. Naidu Street,Gavarapalem, Anakapalle, Visakhapatnam District. ...Petitioners AND

1. VILLURI RAMU, S/o. Mahalakshmi Naidu, Hindu, Aged about 67 years, R/at D. No. 15-22-6, Villuri Parandhamayyagari Veedhi,

2. Villuri Prasanna Kumar, S/o. Ramu, Hindu, Aged about 40 years, Rest -do-.

3. Villuri Surya Kumari, W/o. Venkata Rao, Hindu, Aged about 71 years, Rest -do-.

4. Villuri Mahalakshmi Naidu, S/o. Venkata Rao, Hindu, Aged about 48 years, Rest -do-.

5. Villuri Suresh, S/o. Venkata Rao, Hindu, Aged about 45 years, Rest- do-.

6. Kandregula Ramadevi, W/o. Murali Venkata Rao, Hindu, Aged 50 years, Household duties, R/at C/o. Kandregula Kondababu, near China Ramaswamy Temple, Dasarigedda Road,

7. Peela Mangaveni, W/o. Janardhan, Hindu, Household Duties, R/at C/o. Peela Satyanarayana, Document Writer, Near Satyanarayana Murthy Temple, Sunkarametta Junction, Ankapalle, Visakhapatnam District. ...Respondents Counsel for the Petitioners: VENKATESWARA RAO GUDAPATI Counsel for the Respondents: G VIVEKANAND

CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL NO: 36 OF 2022 Between:

1. Villuri Reddemma Naidu,, S/o. late Raghava Jagannadham Naidu, Hindu, Aged 56 years, Cultivation, Residing at D. No. 18- 10-11/2, V.J. Naidu Street, Gavarapalem, Anakapalle, Visakhapatnam District.

2. Villuri Mahalakshmi Naidu, , S/o. late Raghava Jagannadham Naidu, Hindu, Aged 48 years, Cultivation, Residing at D. No. 18- 10-11/2, V.J. Naidu Street, Gavarapalem, Anakapalle,

...Petitioners AND

1. Villuri Ramu, S/o. Mahalakshmi Naidu, Hindu, Aged about 67 years, R/at D. No. 15-22-6, Villuri Parandhamayyagari Veedhi, Gavarapalem, Anakapalle, Visakhapatnam District.

2. Villuri Prasanna Kumar, S/o. Ramu, Hindu, Aged about 40 years, Rest -do-.

3. Villuri Surya Kumari, W/o. Venkata Rao, Hindu, Aged about 71 years, Rest -do-.

4. Villuri Mahalakshmi Naidu, , S/o. Venkata Rao, Hindu, Aged about 48 years, Rest -do-.

5. Villuri Suresh, S/o. Venkata Rao, Hindu, Aged about 45 years, Rest- do-.

6. Kandregula Ramadevi, W/o. Murali Venkata Rao, Hindu, Aged 50 years, Household duties, R/at C/o. Kandregula Kondababu, near China Ramaswamy Temple, Dasarigedda Road, Gavarapalem, Anakapalle, Visakhapatnam District.

7. Peela Mangaveni, W/o. Janardhan, Hindu, Household Duties, R/at go. Peela Satyanarayana, Document Writer, Near Satyanarayana Murthy Temple, Sunkarametta Junction, Ankapalle, Visakhapatnam District. ...Respondents Counsel for the Petitioners: VENKATESWARA RAO GUDAPATI Counsel for the Respondents: G VIVEKANAND The Court made the following:

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE D.RAMESH AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE A.HARI HARANADHA SARMA CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL No.35 OF 2022 and CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL No.36 OF 2022 COMMON JUDGMENT: (Per Hon’ble Sri Justice D.Ramesh)

C.M.A.No.35 of 2022 is filed aggrieved by the orders dated 08.11.2021 passed in I.A.No.135 of 2021 in O.S.No.03 of 2021 on the file of the Court of the X Additional District and Sessions Judge, Visakhapatnam at Anakapalle.

2. C.M.A.No.36 of 2022 is filed aggrieved by the orders dated 08.11.2021 passed in I.A.No.136 of 2021 in O.S.No.03 of 2021 on the file of the Court of the X Additional District and Sessions Judge, Visakhapatnam at Anakapalle.

3. Heard the learned counsel for the appellants and the learned counsel for the respondents.

4. The petitioners/plaintiffs are appellants herein. They filed I.A.No.135 of 2021 in O.S.No.03 of 2021, under Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 read with Section 151 C.P.C., seeking ad-interim injunction restraining the respondents/defendants from making any further construction in plaint ‘A’ schedule property pending disposal of the suit.

5. The petitioners/plaintiffs also filed I.A.No.136 of 2021 in O.S.No.03 of 2021, under Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 read with Section 151 C.P.C., seeking ad-interim injunction restraining the respondents/defendants from alienating the plaint ‘A’ and ‘B’ schedule properties in any mode of conveyance like gift deed, mortgage and sale etc., pending disposal of the suit.

6. I.A.No.135 of 2021 in O.S.No.03 of 2021 was considered and dismissed by vacating the status-quo order dated 22.02.2021. I.A.No.136 of 2021 in O.S.No.03 of 2021 was also dismissed.

7. No interim orders were granted in the appeals. While considering the appeals for disposal, after hearing the learned counsel for both parties and as the main suit itself is pending for disposal, we are not inclined to interfere with the impugned orders. However, as requested by the learned counsel for the appellants, both the Civil Miscellaneous Appeals are disposed of directing the learned X Additional District and Sessions Judge, Visakhapatnam at Anakapalle to dispose of O.S.No.03 of 2021

expeditiously without being influenced by the observations made in the impugned orders. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. _______________________ JUSTICE D.RAMESH

_________________________________________ JUSTICE A.HARI HARANADHA SARMA Date: 07.10.2026 Ivd Whether the order is: Speaking Yes Reasoned No Reportable No Non-reportable Yes

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE D.RAMESH AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE A.HARI HARANADHA SARMA

CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL No.35 OF 2022 and CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL No.36 OF 2022

Dated: 07.10.2026

Ivd