1 APHC010132092024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3333] THURSDAY,THE TWENTY FIFTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE V.SUJATHA CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO: 607/2024 Between: 1. RAVISHETTY ALIAS PERALA KAVITHA,, W/O R. RANJEETH KUMAR, AGED 39 YEARS , PRIVATE EMPLOYEE, H.NO. 3-7-35/1, VITTAL NAGAR, NEAR RAMA TEMPLE CHIRALA, PRAKASAM DISTRICT, A.P ...PETITIONER AND 1. RANJEETH KUMAR RAVISHETTY, S/o Krishna, aged 39 years. Employee in HAL and R/o PB No. 83425, HAL, Barrackpore division 9, Topkhana Road, Kolkata. ...RESPONDENT Petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India,praying that in the circumstances stated in the grounds filed herein,the High Court may be pleased topleased to set aside the order and decretal order dated 24.11.2023 passed in I.A.No. 139/2023 IN F.C.O.P.No. 38 of 2023 on the file of the court of Family- Cum- VIII Additional District Judge, Prakasam at Ongole by allowing this CRP with costs throughout and pass IA NO: 1 OF 2024 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 pleased to grant stay of operation of the order dated 24.11.2023 passed in I.A 2 NO.139 of 2023 IN FCOP No. 38 of 2023 on the file of the court of Family- Cum- VIII Additional District Judge Prakasam at Ongole, pending disposal of main C R P and to pass Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. CHIRANJEEVI TANIKONDA Counsel for the Respondent: 1. The Court made the following: 3 ORDER: When the civil revision petition came up for hearing on 01.08.2025, there was no representation on behalf of learned counsel for the petitioner, as such, the matter was posted to 11.08.2025. Even on 11.08.2025, as there was no representation for the petitioner, the matter was directed to be posted on 25.09.2025, under the caption ‘for dismissal’. Today, though the matter was posted under the caption ‘for dismissal’, there is no representation on behalf of the counsel for the petitioner. It appears that the petitioner is not evincing any interest in the present case. As a sequel, miscellaneous applications, pending, if any, shall also stand closed. ____________________ JUSTICE V.SUJATHA Date :25.09.2025. Gss