Back
2024 Supreme(AP) 115
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI
VENUTHURUMALLI GOPALA KRISHNA RAO, J.
Malla Satyanarayana S/o Late Durgu Naidu – Petitioner
Versus
Lanka Venkata Ramanamma W/o Late Venkateswarlu Garu – Respondent
First Appeal Nos. 609, 610 of 2005
Decided On : 06-02-2024
Advocate Appeared:
For the Petitioner: S. Srinivas Reddy.
For the Respondent: M.S.R. Subrahmanyam.
Dismissal for non-prosecution when there is no representation on both sides
Headnote:
Dismissal - Non-prosecution - The court dismissed the appeal suits for non-prosecution, with no costs and closed any pending miscellaneous petitions.
Fact of the Case:
The appeal suits were listed for hearing but there was no representation on both sides, indicating the appellants' lack of inclination to prosecute the appeals.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that there was no representation on both sides and concluded that the appellants were not inclined to prosecute the appeals, leading to the dismissal of the appeal suits for non-prosecution.
Issues: Lack of representation on both sides, appellants' inclination to prosecute the appeals
Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision was influenced by the lack of representation on both sides and the apparent lack of inclination of the appellants to prosecute the appeals.
Final Decision: The appeal suits were dismissed for non-prosecution with no costs, and any pending miscellaneous petitions were closed.
JUDGMENT :
VENUTHURUMALLI GOPALA KRISHNA RAO, J.
1. When these matters was listed on 31.01.2024, there was no representation on both sides and the matters were posted to 06.02.2024, under the caption “For Dismissal.”
2. Today, when the matters are taken up for hearing, there is no representation on both sides, it seems that the appellants are not inclined to prosecute the appeals.
3. Accordingly, the Appeal Suits are dismissed for non-prosecution. No costs.
4. As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions, if any pending, shall stand closed.
