Andhra Pradesh High Court
AS/440/2017 of Vediam Rama Murthy Reddy, Vs Chamarthi Sujatha, on 26 July 2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3603] MONDAY, THE 27th DAY OF JULY 2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE D RAMESH THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE ALAPATI GIRIDHAR APPEAL SUIT NO: 440/2017 Between: 1. VEDIAM RAMA MURTHY REDDY,, S/O KANNAPPA
APHC010392502017
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA
PRADESH
AT AMARAVATI
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
MONDAY, THE 27th DAY OF JULY 2026
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE D RAMESH
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE ALAPATI GIRIDHAR
APPEAL SUIT NO: 440/2017
Between:
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.
1. VEDIAM RAMA MURTHY REDDY,, S/O KANNAPPA REDDY, HINDU, AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS, RESIDING AT D.NO.28-116/ 1, V.K.R.COMPLEX, TIRUPATI BYPASS ROAD, PUTTUR, CHITTOOR DISTRICT.
...APPELLANT AND
1. CHAMARTHI SUJATHA, W/O LATE CHAMARATHI RAMACHANDRA RAJU, HINDU, AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS, BUSINESS,
2. CHAMARTHI HARIKA TEJA, W/O LATE C.VISHNU PRABHU, HINDU, AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS,
3. CHAMARTHI REKHA, W/O SRI PRABHAKAR, HINDU, AGED 36 YEARS, BUSINESS; DEFENDANTS 1 AND 3 ARE RESIDING AT LAKSHMI NAGAR COLONY, PUTTUR MANDAL, CHITTOOR DISTRICT.
4. CHAMARTHI VANDANA, W/O C.YUVARAJ, HINDU, AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS, NO.16, THIRUMOORTHY STREET, NEAR KAMARAJAR MEMORAIAL HALL, VIA.VANI
MAHAL, VALLUVARKOTTAM ROAD, THYAGARAYA NAGAR, CHENNAI, TAMIL NADU
...RESPONDENT(S):
Counsel for the Appellant:
1. M DORAI RAJ Counsel for the Respondent(S):
1. V JAGAPATHI
2. P GOVIND REDDY The Court made the following:
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE D.RAMESH THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE ALAPATI GIRIDHAR APPEAL SUIT No.440 of 2017 JUDGMENT: (Per Hon’ble Sri Justice D.Ramesh) On 29.06.2026, there was no representation for the appellant. Hence, the matter was directed to be listed on 13.07.2026 under the caption ‘for dismissal’. On 13.07.2026, at request of learned counsel for the appellant, the matter was adjourned to 27.07.2026.
2. Sri K.Koutilya, learned counsel representing Sri V.Jagapathi, learned counsel for respondent No.1, is present.
3. Today also, despite the matter being listed under the caption ‘for dismissal’, none appeared for the appellant to press the appeal. This indicates that the appellant is not interested in pursuing the matter.
4. Accordingly, the Appeal is dismissed for non-prosecution. There shall be no order as to costs.
As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. _______________________ JUSTICE D.RAMESH
_________________________________ JUSTICE ALAPATI GIRIDHAR Date: 27.07.2026 Ivd Whether the order is: Speaking Yes Reasoned No Reportable No Non-reportable Yes
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE D.RAMESH THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE ALAPATI GIRIDHAR
APPEAL SUIT No.440 of 2017
Dated: 27.07.2026
Ivd