CMA/1309/2012 of Mr.Tatapudi Ramu Vs Mr.Tatapudi Malleswari on 18 August 2026

1. Mr.Tatapudi Ramu, S/o.Chinna Rao Un-employee R/o.Thotagaruvu (V), Chinagadili (M), VISAKHAPATNAM DISTRICT. ...Petitioner AND

1. Mr Tatapudi Malleswari, W/o.Ramu House-hold C/o.Chittabattula Chinna Rao, Varber Shop, Hanumanthavaka Junction, ...Respondent Appeal Under Section_____against orders IA NO: 1 OF 2004(CMAMP 11772 OF 2004 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 condone the delay of 30 days in filing the CMA against the decree and order in OP no.473/2000. IA NO: 6 OF 2004(CMAMP 45424 OF 2004 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 IA NO: 1 OF 2005(CMAMP 132 OF 2005

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 IA NO: 1 OF 2011(CMAMP 2338 OF 2011 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 condone the delay of 186 days in filing application for restoration of CMA SR No. 41586/2004 or to pass IA NO: 2 OF 2011(CMAMP 2339 OF 2011 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to dispense with filing of the copy of the docket proceedings dated 29-01-2009 since it is non-draftable order in CMASR No. 41586/2004 or to pass IA NO: 3 OF 2011(CMAMP 35650 OF 2011 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 IA NO: 1 OF 2012(CMAMP 105 OF 2012 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 restore the order dated 29-1-2009 in CMP.No.11772/2004 in CMAS.RNO.41586 of 2004 and receive the batta to the respondent to her correct address and decide the matter on merits Counsel for the Petitioner: N (P) ANJANA DEVI SATYANARAYANA Counsel for the Respondent The Court made the following order:

JUDGMENT: (Per Hon’ble Sri Justice D.Ramesh) The Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is filed by the husband whose application for dissolution of marriage has been dismissed vide order dated 24.3.2004 in O.P.No.473/2000 on the file of the learned Judge, Family Court, Visakhapatnam. As learned counsel for the appellant is no more, this Court directed the Registry to issue notice to the appellant and the Registry has issued notice to the appellant and the notice was returned with an endorsement that ‘insufficient address’. The notice has been sent to the address furnished by the appellant himself and the same was returned with an endorsement ‘insufficient address’. Considering the same, the appeal is dismissed for non- prosecution. If any application is filed for revival, the same shall be considered and pass appropriate orders. No costs.

As a sequel thereto, interlocutory applications pending, if any, in the writ petition, shall also stand closed.

__________________ JUSTICE D.RAMESH

__________________________________ JUSTICE A. HARI HARANADHA SARMA 19.8.2026 RD

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

CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL No.1309 of 2012 19.8.2026 RD