! V IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATJ FRIDAY, THE THIRTY FIRST DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT f/ ii" HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE T MALLIKARJUNA RAO SECOND APPEAL NO: 669 OF 2002 Second Appeal under Section 100 of CPC, against the Judgment and Decree dated; 19-2-2002 passed in A.S.No.56 of 1996 on the file Court of I Additional District Judge, Nellore dismissing the Judgment and Decree dated; 8-10-1996 passed in OS No.41 of 1994 on the file of the Court of the Subordinate Judge, Kovur. Between; Kolagatia Masthanamma, W/o. Late Venkatasubbareddy, aged about 65 years. Landowner and resident of Allurpet, Allur Mandalam, Nellore District. ...APPELLANT/RESPONDENTN 0.1/PLAINTIFF AND Kondala Siva Rami Reddy, S/o. A.Reddy, aged about 49 years. Driver of Motor Vehicle and resident of Allurpet, Allur Mandal, Nellore District. Kandala Ravindra Reddy Kandala Ramakrishna Reddy (Died) Kandala Kousalyamma Kandala Jyothi Kandala Jyotsna (Respondents 2 to 6 are not necessary parties in this Appeal) ...RESPONDENT/APPELLANT/DEFENDANT N0.3 Counsel for the Appellant(s):SRI. A BALA BARATHI Counsel for the Respondent No.1: SRICHARAN TELAPROLU The Court made the following JUDGMENT: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. APHC010240612002 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) SyH [3369] FRIDAY ,THE THIRTY FIRST DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND tWeNTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE T. MALLIKARJUNA RAO SECOND APPEAL NO: 669/2002 Between: \ Kolagatia Masthanamma ...APPELLANT AND Kondala Siva Rami Reddy And 5 Ors Counsel for the Appellant: 1.A BALA BARATHI Counsel for the Respondent: 1.SRICHARAN TELAPROLU The Court made the following JUDGMENT: ...RESPONDENT 1. This Second Appeal was filed by the appellant/plaintiff under Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (for short, 'C.P.C.') against the Judgment and decree, dated 19.02.2002 passed in A.S.No.56 of 1996 on the file of learned I Additional District Judge’s Court, Nellore, reversing the judgment and decree, dated 08.10.1996 passed in O.S.No.58 of 1989 on the file of learned Subordinate Judge’s Court, Kovvur. Today, when the matter is taken up for hearing in the morning session, no representation on behalf of appellant. Learned counsel for the respondents is present. The matter was subsequently passed over at 2.15 P.M. 2. m 3. In the afternoon 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 prosecute 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. i/ SD/-M.RAMESH BABU DEPUTY REGISTRAR SECTION OFFICER //TRUE COPY// To, 1. The I Additional District Judge, Nellore (with records, if any) 2. The Subordinate Judge, Kovur, Nellore District (with records, if any) 3. OneCCto SRI. A BALA BARATHI Advocate [OPUC] 4. One CC to SRI. SRICHARAN TELAPROLU Advocate [OPUC] 5. The Section Officer, VR Section, High Court of Andhra Pradesh, Amaravathi. 6. Three CD Copies RDB m HIGH COURT DATED:31/01/2025 JUDGMENT AND«^ SA.No.669 of 2002 O o 15 FEB 2025 ,VO^ Current Section ^ *5 XLo«P*TCVf!S9>' SECOND APPEAL IS DISMISSED FOR DEFAULT