MERCURY COMMERCIAL COMP.GUNTUR v. NALAM KOTESWARA RAO
SA/178/2003 · 2025-02-19
T Mallikarjuna Rao
Original Suitbody2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 17593 (AP) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 17593 (AP) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
APHC010240912003
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3369] WEDNESDAY ,THE NINETEENTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE T. MALLIKARJUNA RAO SECOND APPEAL NO: 178/2003 Between: Mercury Commercial Comp.guntur ...APPELLANT AND Nalam Koteswara Rao ...RESPONDENT Counsel for the Appellant:
1. S RAJ KUMAR Counsel for the Respondent:
1. V AJAYAKUMAR The Court made the following JUDGMENT:
1. This Second Appeal was filed by the appellant/defendant under Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (for short, 'C.P.C.') against the Judgment and decree, dated 15.11.2002 passed in A.S.No.26 of 2000 on the file of learned IV Additional District Judge, Guntur, reversing the judgment and decree, dated 06.12.1999 passed in O.S.No.938 of 1998 on the file of learned III Additional Junior Civil Judge, Guntur.
2. Today, when the matter is taken up for hearing in the morning session, no representation on behalf of either side. The matter was subsequently passed over at 2.15 P.M.
3. In the post lunch session also, there was no representation on behalf of the appellant despite listing the matter under the caption ‘for dismissal’. It seems that the appellant is not evincing any interest to proceed with the appeal.
4. Accordingly, the Second Appeal is dismissed for default. However, there shall be no order as to costs.
Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, in this appeal shall stand closed. _____________________________ JUSTICE T. MALLIKARJUNA RAO
Date:19.02.2025 MS
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE T.MALLIKARJUNA RAO
SECOND APPEAL NO.178 OF 2003 Date:19.02.2025
MS