Andhra Pradesh High Court
CRP/304/2020 of TAMARANA SUNNETA Vs TAMARANA RAMUNAIDU on 21 December 2025
HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3560] MONDAY, THE TWENTY SECOND DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBHENDU SAMANTA CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO: 304 OF 2020 Between: 1. TAMARANA SUNNETA, W/O TALUPULAYYA, AGED
APHC010039062020
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
AT AMARAVATI
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
[3560]
MONDAY,THE TWENTY SECOND DAY OF DECEMBER
TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBHENDU SAMANTA
CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO: 304 OF 2020
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. TAMARANA SUNNETA, W/O TALUPULAYYA, AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS, OCC. HOUSE WIFE, R/O VELAMAKOTHURU VILLAGE, TUNI MANDAL, E.G.DIST.,
...PETITIONER AND
1. TAMARANA RAMUNAIDU, S/O SURI BABU, AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, OCC. CULTIVATION, R/O TALLURU VILLAGE, TUNI MANDAL, E.G.DIST,
2. TAMARANA TALUPULAYYA, S/O SIMHACHALAM, AGED 57 YEARS, OCC. CULTIVATION, R/O TALLURU VILLAGE, TUNI MANDAL,
3. SAPPA SRINU, S/O SURAYYA, AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS, OCC. CULTIVATION, R/O VELAMPETA VILLAGE, TUNI MANDAL, E.G.DIST,
...RESPONDENT(S): Counsel for the Petitioner:
1. PALLA BALU ANIL KUMAR Counsel for the Respondent(S):
1. The Court made the following Order :
This matter is appearing in the list under the caption “For Dismissal”.
2. The instant Civil Revision Petition has preferred aggrieved by an order dated 08.06.2018 in E.P.No.47 of 2018 in O.S.No.137 of 2015 on the file of Principal Civil Judge (Junior Division), Tuni (for brevity “Court below”). It appears that the Petitioner has challenging the exparte order passed by learned Court below in the Execution Petition.
3. It appears from the impugned order that learned Court below has proceeded according to law as enumerated under Order 21, Rule 11(2) of CPC and other connected provisions therein. I find no illegality or impropriety in the order.
4. Accordingly, the impugned order passed by the learned Court below suffers no illegality or impropriety. Thereby, I find no justification to entertain the present Civil Revision Petition.
5. Accordingly, the instant Civil Revision Petition is considered and dismissed as meritless. Interim order, if any, passed by this Court during pendency of Civil Revision Petition is hereby vacated.
As a sequel, miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall stand closed. ______________________ SUBHENDU SAMANTA, J
Date: 22.12.2025 KK
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBHENDU SAMANTA
CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO: 304 OF 2020
Date: 22.12.2025
KK