CCCA/239/2010 of SMT. SARASWATHI DEVI, HYD AND 2OTS Vs C. VITTAL RAO, HYD AND ANO on 6 November 2025

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA

AT HYDERABAD

THURSDAY,THE SIXTH DAY OF NOVETVIBER

TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE

PRESENT

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K.LAKSHMAN

AND

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VAKITI RAMAKRISHNA REDDY

CITY

L COURT

EAL NO: 239

Appeal Under Section 96 of C.P.C. aggrieved by the Judgment and Decree dated 6-10-2010 in O.S.No. 207 ot 2006 on the file of the Court of the X Additional chief Judge (FTC) City Civil court at Hyderabad.

Between:

1. SMT. Saraswathi Devi, wo. Kanthi Lal chandulal Khatri, Household R/o.

H.N". S-i-iAO, Risata Abdullah Osmangunj, Hyderabad - 500 095 A.P.

2. Smt. Puspa Devi, Wo. Khoob Chand Khodare, Household R/o' H'No' 5-2- 5AO, nisaia Abduliah Osmangunj, Hyderabad - 500 095 A'P'

3. Khanthi Lal Chandulal Khatri,, S/o. Chandulal Khatri, Business R/o. H.No. 5-2- g80, Risala Abdullah Osmangunj, Hyderabad - 500 095 A'P'

...APPELLANTS/ Plaintiffs

AND

1. C. Vittal Rao, s/o. Late c. Narayana, Bus!qe9s_R/o. H.No. 5-2-474, Risala Abdullah, Osmangunj, Hyderabad - 500 095 A'P'

2. The Prudential Co-op Urban Bank !td., Rep by its Managing Director R'P'

Road, Secunderabad - 500 003 A.P.

...RESPONDENTS/ ResPondents

l.A. NO: 1 OF 201O(CCCAMP. NO: 795 OF 20101

petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, ine Hign Court may be pleased to passeO order staying tne JuOgment and Decree dated 6-10-2010 passed in OS

NO. 207 of 2006 paised by the court of Hon'ble X Addl- Chief Judge, City Civil Court at Hyderabad till the disposal of the above appeal'

Counsel for the Appeltant: SRl. NAGA SRINIVAS RAO ( not present)

Counsel for the Respondents: NONE APPEARED

The Court delivered following Judgment:

TIIE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K. LAKSTIMAN

and

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VAKITI RAMAKRISHNA REDDY

CITY CI]

COURT APPEAL No.239 of 2010

JUDGMENT: (per the Hon'ble Srt Justice K.LAKSHMAN)

Despite listing the matter under the caption "For Dismissal", even today, there is no representation on behalf of either the appellants or the respondents.

2. A perusal of the record reveals that, considering the fact that the suit was filed for specific perforrnance and the same was dismissed, this Court referred the matter to the Lok Adalat. The appellants were ready for settlement before the Lok Adalat; however, there was no representation on behalf of the respondents.

3.

When the matter was listed on 10.L0.2025 for hearing, Sri Praveen Bonkuri, learned counsel, submitted that he had instructions to appear on behalf of the appellants but had not entered his appearance

4.

In light of the aforesaid discussion, the City Civil Court Appeal is dismissed for non-prosecution. There shall be no order as to costs As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed.

Sd/. N. SRIHARI

DEPUTY REGISTRAR

o

//TRUE COPYII

SECTION OFFICER

To,

1. The X Additional Chief Judge (FTC) City Civil Court at Hyderabad.

records )

2. One CC to SRl. NAGA SRINIVAS RAO Advocate [OPUC]

3. One CC to SRl. DILIP KUMAR SHIRODKAR Advocate [OPUC]

4. Two CD Copies

(with

kul/sa

(&--

\ \

r'

HIGH COURT

DATED:0611112025