Andhra Pradesh High Court

CRP/2097/2025 of SHAIK SAYAD ALI Vs M/S SRIRAM CITY UNION FINANCE LIMITED on 6 April 2026

Cites 0, Cited by 0

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3572] TUESDAY, THE SEVENTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI NATH TILHARI THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE BALAJI MEDAMALLI CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO: 2097/2025

APHC010423872025

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH

AT AMARAVATI

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

TUESDAY,THE SEVENTH DAY OF APRIL

TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX

PRESENT

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI NATH TILHARI

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE BALAJI MEDAMALLI

CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO: 2097/2025

Between:

Citations and Judicial Treatment

No citing decisions in the index yet

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…

1. SHAIK SAYAD ALI, S/O SHAIK MOHAMMAD ALL, AGED ABOUT _ YEARS, OCC RECORD ASSISTANT IN V ADDL. DISTRICT COURT, RAJAMAHENDRAVARAM, R/O D.NO.44-15-39,PEDDA VEEDHI, ANNAPURNAMPETA, RAJAMAHENDRAVARAM, ANDHRA PRADESH.

...PETITIONER AND

1. M/S SRIRAM CITY UNION FINANCE LIMITED, BRANCH OFFICE, AMALAPURAM, REP BY ITS REGIONAL MANAGER AND GPA HOLDER, D. RAMMOHAN, S/O LAKSHMI NARAYANA, AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS, RAJAMAHENDRAVARAM.

2. GARAPATI LEVA RAJU, S/O NARAYANA RAO, AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS, VENKATA DURGA FLOWER DECORATION SHOP, AMALAPURAM, R/O D.NO.8-1-60, GARAPATI STREET, AMALAPURAM, EAST GODAVARI DISTRICT- 533201.

3. GARAPATI DURGA SURESH, S/O NAGESWARA RAO, AGED ABOUT 29 YEARS, OCC AGRICULTURE, R/O D.NO.2-1-4, ABBIREDDY VAARI STREET, AMALAPURAM, EAST GODAVARI DISTRICT- 533201.

4. KARANGI PADMA RAO, S/O VEERRAJU, AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS,

OCC SANITARY INSPECTOR, MUNICIPAL CORPORATION, PUBLIC HEALTH WORKER,

MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OFFICE, RAJAHMUNDRY,

R/O D.NO.45-11-16/3, RELLI VEEDHI, THADITHOTA, RAJAHMUNDRY, EAST GODAVARI DISTRICT- 533101.

5. THE V ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE, RAJAMAHENDRAVARAM, EAST GODAVARI DISTRICT.

...RESPONDENT(S): Counsel for the Petitioner:

1. AJAY KUMAR KANAPARTHI Counsel for the Respondent(S):

1. O UDAYA KUMAR The Court made the following:

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI NATH TILHARI THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE BALAJI MEDAMALLI C.R.P.No.2097 of 2025 ORDER: (per Hon’ble Sri Justice Ravi Nath Tilhari)

On 17.09.2025, the following order was passed: “I.A No.2 of 2025

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner/JDr.No.4.

Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner and in the light of the averments made in the affidavit filed in support of the I.A., there shall be stay of operation of the order dated 06.03.2025 in A.R.B.E.P No.144 of 2023 in ARC No.17 of 2020 on the file of the Court of VIII Additional District & Sessions Judge Cum Special Court for Trial of Offences against Women, East Godavari District, Rajamahendravaram, subject to the condition of the petitioner/JDR.No.4 depositing 1/3rd of the decretal amount along with costs and interest, within a period of eight (08) weeks to the credit of the E.P. C.R.P No.2097 of 2025

List the matter on 12.11.2025.”

2. On 17.02.2026, the following order was passed: “On 17.09.2025, a Co-ordinate Bench granted an interim order in the execution proceedings, subject to the condition of the petitioner/J.Dr.No.4 depositing 1/3rd of the decretal amount, together with costs and interest, within the stipulated period.

2. Sri A. Ravi Kiran, learned counsel representing Sri K. Ajay Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner, seeks an adjournment to obtain instructions with regard to the compliance of the interim order.

3. List after three (03) weeks.”

3. On the request of the petitioner’s counsel, the matter was adjourned to obtain instructions with regard to the terms of the interim order which complied or not.

4. On 10.03.2026 there was no representation for the petitioner.

5. Today also, there is no representation for the petitioner.

6. Ms.T.Priyanka, learned counsel representing Sri O.Uday Kumar, learned Standing Counsel for the 1st respondent/decree holder, submits that the terms of the interim order has not been complied and the petitioner has not deposited the amount.

7. Since there is no representation for the petitioner today and also on the previous date and further as pursuant to the time taken to obtain instructions on 17.02.2026, nothing has been filed indicating the compliance of the interim order, the C.R.P is dismissed for want of prosecution. There shall be no order as to costs.

As a sequel, interlocutory applications pending if any, shall stand closed. _____________________ RAVI NATH TILHARI, J

_____________________ BALAJI MEDAMALLI, J Date: 07.04.2026. Pab

You have used today's free searches. Sign in, for free, to keep searching without a limit.

Compass reads the judgments for you and finds the paragraphs for and against your question. Sign in to use it.

My Vault follows judgments for you and records every later decision that cites them. Sign in to keep one.

Sign in to download the court's PDF. The full text stays free to read here.

Sign in, for free, to download the court copy. Reading the full text here stays open to everyone.

Search and read Indian judgments without limits, save them to My Vault and find the relevant paragraphs with Compass.

Open the sign-in page instead