Andhra Pradesh High Court
CMA/27/2011 of Y.SAMSON RAJU Vs AP ENDOWMENTS TRIBUNAL & 2 ORS on 24 September 2025
HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3459] THURSDAY, THE TWENTY FIFTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE SUMATHI JAGADAM CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL NO: 27/2011 Between: 1. Y.SAMSON RAJU, S/O.LATE KONDAL RAO
APHC010589912011
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
AT AMARAVATI
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
THURSDAY, THE TWENTY FIFTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER
TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE SUMATHI JAGADAM
CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL NO: 27/2011
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. Y.SAMSON RAJU, S/O.LATE KONDAL RAO BUSINESS R/O.MUKTESHWARAM, INAVILLI MADNAL, EAST GODAVARI DISTRICT.
...APPELLANT AND
1. AP ENDOWMENTS TRIBUNAL, REP BY ITS ADDL.COMMISSIONER O/O.ENDOWMENTS, HYDERABAD.
2. ASST COMMISSIONER, ENDOWMENTS DEPARTMENT O/O.RAJAHMUNDRY, EAST GODAVARI DISTRICT.
3. SRIKAKULAPU KRISHNA MRUTHY CHOWLTRY, REP BY ITS MANAGER O/O.MUKTESHWARAM, INAVILLI MANDAL, EAST GODAVARI DISTRICT.
...RESPONDENT(S): IA NO: 1 OF 2011(CMAMP 73 OF 2011 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased grant interim suspension of the judgment passed by the respondent No.1 in OA No.173/205 [of D.C.Kakinada] dated 08.09.2010 in IA No.1874/2010 pending disposal of the above CMA in the interest of justice
JS,J C.M.A.No.27/2011
IA NO: 4 OF 2011(CMAMP 1608 OF 2011 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased Counsel for the Appellant:
1. NYAYAPATHI PRASHANT Counsel for the Respondent(S):
1. GP FOR ARBITRATION
2. KAPPERA KOTESWARA RAO SC for Endowments, AP Region.
3. ELEVATED AS JUDGE
JS,J C.M.A.No.27/2011
The Court made the following JUDGMENT:
No representation for the appellant.
As there was no representation for the appellant on 11.07.2025, the matter was directed to be listed on 31.07.2025. On 31.07.2025 there was no representation for the appellant. Hence, the matter was directed to be listed on 04.09.2025. On 04.09.2025 also there was no representation for the appellant, hence, the matter was adjourned to 11.09.2025. When the matter was called on 11.09.2025, there was no representation for the appellant. Hence, the matter was directed to be listed today under the caption “for dismissal”.
Today when the matter is called, there is no representation for the appellant. It appears that the appellant is not interested to prosecute the case.
Hence, the Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is dismissed as non-prosecution. No order as to costs.
As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any shall stand closed.
__________________________ JUSTICE SUMATHI JAGADAM Date: 25.09.2025 KAS
JS,J
THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE SUMATHI JAGADAM
CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL NO: 27/2011
Date: 25.09.2025 KAS