Raya Joseph Rajini v. Thumma Prathap Redduy
This judgment came from a scanned document and its text layer is unreliable — words may be garbled. Check the original PDF before relying on any passage.
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA
AT HYDERABAD TUESDAY ,THE TWENTY SEVENTH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY TWO PRESENT THE HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE SHAMEEM AKTHER AND THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE NAGESH BHEEMAPAKA r.A. NO. 1 0F 2019 IN/AND CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL NO: 961 OF 2019 c.M.A. NO. 961 0F 2019 :
Appeal Under Order 43 Rule 1 (d) of C.P.C. against the order Docket Order dated 26-04-2018 in l.A.No. 231 ot 2018 of F.C.O.P.No. 283 of 2014 on the file of the Hon'ble Family Court Judge, Ranga Reddy District at L.B.Nagar, Hyderabad.
Between:
Raya Joseph Rajini. Wo. Tumma Prathap Occupation Housewife, R/o Flat No. 15/302, Enclave, Maqta, tVliyapur. Hyderabad - 500 049. Reddy, Aged about 38 Years, Sri Sai Residency, Krishna Sai ... Petitioner / Petitioner / Respondent in both AND I Thumma Prathap Reddy. S/o Elias Reddy, Aged about 38 Years, Occ. Private Service. R/o Shoripur Village, Doulatabad Mandal, Medak District - 502 247 . ...RESPONDENT/ Respondent / Petitioner in both lA NO: 1 OF 2019 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated rn the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to condone the delay of 420 days in representing the S.R. No. 46459 of 2019 lA NO: 2 OF 2019 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated rn the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to stay
the operation of orde and decree daled. 29-04-2014 passed rrr O P No 283 of 2014 on the file of the Hon'ble Family Court Judge at L.B Nag:r- HyCerabad Counsel for the Appr llant in both : SRl. T. P. ACHARYA Counsel for the ResJ ondent in both : MALIPEDDI SRINIVAS ttEDDY The Court delivered thefollowing: COMMON JUDGMENT
THE HON,BLE DT. JUSTICE SHAMEEM AKTHER AND THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE NAGESH BHEEMAPAKA I.A.No.1 of 2019 inland CIVIL MIS CELLA EOUS APPEA No.9610F2o19 CO MON UDGMENT : (Per Hon'ble Dr.SA,t) Heard both sides. perused the record.
2.
I.A.No.1 of 2019 is filed to condone the delay of 4zo days in representing the SR No.46459 of 2019. 3.
On 21.10.2019, this Court was pleased to pass the iollowing order in I.A.No.1 of 2019:
"The delay of 42O days in representing the SR No.46459 oF 2019 is condoned on payment of costs of Rs.200/- to the High Court Legal Services Committee within two (02) weeks."
4.
The office endorsement dated 05.11.2019 reveals that conditional order dated 2t.tO.2otg has not been complied with.
5.
Under these circumstances, I.A.i{c.1 of 2}lg IS dismissed. Consequently, the appeal stands rejected.
Miscellarreous Petitions, if any, pending rn this appeal shall stand clc sed. There shall be no order as to c:,:,'ts. T;d/- K. SRINIVAS RAO, I'
//TRUE coPY/ t JolNTlEGlsrRAR '
SECTION OFFICER The Judge, f amilv Court Ra-nga Reddy District at L.B.llagar, Hyderabad. one cc to sr r. r pacsanVn ao-ro.ui" ltclEi"-'-'- " " To 1.
2.
one cc to sR . MAL|PEDDI sRtNtvAS REDDY Advocate [opt c] Two CD Copi( s \.P
HIGH COURT DRSAJ & NIsKJ DATED:2711212022 l ttt; sr4 r^, o .< \( .t.
) t.
\ 0gttB2[n CO\T\tO\ .r t 1X, L \r r_\ r \:,/l ,f!:
;/ r.A. NO. I OF 2019 IN /,A.ND CMA.No.961 of 2019 DISI\4ISSL\-G l Ht, t ,\ NO I OF 2019 AND REJECTIN(; 'f I IE C r{.{ wll'HOUT COSTS @ a-