SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(AP) 107

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
RAVI NATH TILHARI, MAHESWARA RAO KUNCHEAM
Y.B. Haranath, VIS. S/o. late Venkataramaiah – Appellant
Versus
Satyanarayan Swamy Temple, VIS. – Respondent


Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant : P SRI RAGHU RAM
For the Respondent: GP FOR LAND ACQUISITION

ORDER :

Ravi Nath Tilhari, J.

On 28.08.2024, the following order was passed:

“As it is represented that Mr.P.Sri Raghu Ram has given up his Vakalat and no longer represents that petitioner, list this case on 18.09.2024.

2. Registry is directed to issue notice to the petitioner to enable him to make alternative arrangements”.

2. As per the office report, the petitioner has been served on 14.10.2024.

3. Ms. Y.Bhanu Sri Akhila, learned counsel representing Sri P.Sri Raghu Ram, learned counsel for the petitioner, submits that no-objection vakalat was given and seeks adjournment. This fact was already recorded in the order dated 28.08.2024, directing the petitioner to make alternative arrangements. However, despite service of the notice, the petitioner has not made any alternative arrangements. Adjournment is declined.

4. Today, when the matter is taken up, there is no other representation for the petitioner.

5. The Writ Petition is dismissed “for want of prosecution”.

No order as to costs.

As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous petitions, if any pending, shall also stand closed.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top