Andhra Pradesh High Court
CMA/51/2024 of DASARI ANUSWETHA @ SEELAM ANUSWETHA Vs NIL on 5 May 2026
HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3572] WEDNESDAY, THE SIXTH DAY OF MAY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI NATH TILHARI THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE BALAJI MEDAMALLI CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL NO: 51/2024 Between: 1. DASARI
APHC010561282023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
AT AMARAVATI
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
WEDNESDAY, THE SIXTH DAY OF MAY
TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX
PRESENT
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. DASARI ANUSWETHA @ SEELAM ANUSWETHA, W/O. RAVIKISHORE, D/O. DASARI PRASAD, HINDU, AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS, R/O.D.NO.11, KADAMBADI AMMAN KOVLI, 3RD STREET, VALASARAVAKKAM, TIRUVALLUR, ALWARTHIRUNAGAR, CHENNAI
- 600087.
2. SEELAM RAVIKISHORE,, S/O.SEELAM YOGAIAH, HINDU, AGED 39 YEARS, NATIVE OF NAIDUPET TOWN, TIRUPATHI DISTRICT, PRESENTLY WORKING AT ANDOVER, MASSACHUSETTS,
3. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,, REP. BY HIS GENERAL POWER OF ATTORNEY, SEELAM ADI LAKSHMAMMA, W/O. SEELAM YOGAIAH, AGED ABOUT 67 YEARS, RESIDENT OF D.NO.6-12-22B, SBI COLONY, PICHIREDDY THOPU, NAIDUPET, TIRUPATHI DISTRICT
- 524126.
...APPELLANT(S) AND
1. NIL, a
...RESPONDENT Counsel for the Appellant(S):
1. C SUBODH Counsel for the Respondent:
1. The Court made the following:
JUDGMENT:- (per Hon’ble Sri Justice Ravi Nath Tilhari)
Heard Sri C. Subodh, learned counsel appears for the appellants i.e., both husband and wife.
2. The appellants jointly presented the petition seeking divorce by mutual divorce under Section 13(b) of Hindu Marriage Act before the Court of the learned Principal Senior Civil Judge, Tirupati, which as numbered as H.M.O.P.No.164 of 2022.
3. On 01.09.2023, both the parties were absent, and an application was filed seeking adjournment.
4. The learned Court observed that the petition was presented on 29.09.2022 and the date of first adjournment is on 29.03.2023. Thereafter, from time to time the matter has been adjourned for appearance of the parties. Later on, as there was no ground to adjourn the matter, the learned Trial Court dismissed the H.M.O.P.No.164 of 2022 for default.
5. Challenging the said order, the present appeal has been jointly filed by the husband and wife.
6. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that, on several dates as mentioned in para No.2 of the grounds, the parties were present before the Court, but on one date or on few dates they could not appear, and sought adjournment, the learned Trial Court ought not to have taken such a view and dismissed the petition for default.
7. We find force in the submissions advanced by the learned counsel for the appellants.
8. Considering the cause shown in the memo, as stated in paragraph No.3 of the grounds, is sufficient, we allow the present appeal, setting aside the order dismissing the petition for default and restore the H.M.O.P.No.161 of 2022 on the file of the learned Principal Senior Civil Judge, Tirupati.
9. The parties shall appear before the Court concerned within fifteen (15) days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Upon which, the learned Trial Court shall proceed to decide the H.M.O.P. in accordance with law and may also consider to waive the cooling period and considering the previous order pendency since long.
10. The Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is allowed.
11. No order as to costs.
As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous petitions, if any pending, shall also stand closed. ___________________ RAVI NATH TILHARI,J
____________________ BALAJI MEDAMALLI,J
Dated: 06.05.2026 KNN
Dated:06.05.2026 KNN