Andhra Pradesh High Court
CRP/2246/2013 of SURI SETTI KRISHNA (DIED) & 4 OTHERS Vs GREATER VISAKHAPATNAM MUNICIPAL CORPORATION on 23 April 2026
HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3573] FRIDAY, THE TWENTY FOURTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE BALAJI MEDAMALLI CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO: 2246/2013 Between: 1. SURI SETTI KRISHNA (DIED) & 4 OTHERS, - 2.
APHC010174642013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
AT AMARAVATI
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
FRIDAY,THE TWENTY FOURTH DAY OF APRIL
TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE BALAJI MEDAMALLI
CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO: 2246/2013
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. SURI SETTI KRISHNA (DIED) & 4 OTHERS, -
2. SURI SETTI VIJAYA LAKSHMI, W/O LATE KRISHNA, RESIDENT AT D.NO.55-5-62/1, UMA NAGAR, OLD VENKOJIPALEM, VISAKHAPATNAM.
3. SURI SETTI LALITHA RAJKUMAR, S/O LATE KRISHNA, RESIDENT AT D.NO. 55-5-62/1, UMA NAGAR, OLD VENKOJIPALEM, VISAKHAPATNAM.
4. DEDI GNANESWARI CHANDRIKADEVI, W/O MATSYA RAJU, RESIDENT AT D.NO. 55-5-62/1, UMA NAGAR, OLD VENKOJIPALEM, VISAKHAPATNAM.
5. SURI SETTI MAHESWARI LAKSHMI PRASANA, D/O LATE KRISHNA, RESIDENT AT D.NO. 55-5-62/1, UMA NAGAR, OLD VENKOJIPALEM, VISAKHAPATNAM.
...PETITIONER(S) AND
1. GREATER VISAKHAPATNAM MUNICIPAL CORPORATION, Represented by its Commissioner, Visakhapatnam.
...RESPONDENT Counsel for the Petitioner(S):
1. J PRABHAKAR
Counsel for the Respondent:
1. The Court made the following ORDER :
On 23.08.2024, a memo was filed before this Court stating that notices were sent to the petitioners as the counsel for the petitioners is designated as senior counsel and the same were delivered on the petitioners on 29.07.2024. However, no one had contacted the counsel on record. As such, the counsel has reported no instructions.
2. On 10.04.2026, there was no representation for the petitioners and the matter was directed to be listed under the caption ‘for dismissal’.
3. Today, though the matter is listed under the caption ‘for dismissal’, there is no representation for the petitioners.
4. In view of the above, the Civil Revision Petition is dismissed for want of prosecution.
As a sequel, miscellaneous applications, pending, if any, shall stand closed.
__________________________
JUSTICE BALAJI MEDAMALLI Date: 24.04.2026 Dvs
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE BALAJI MEDAMALLI
CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO: 2246 OF 2013 Dt: 24.04.2026 Dvs