Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Andhra Pradesh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 20585 (AP)

Kuchipudi Usha Rani, v. P. Naga Sailaja,

CC/2919/2024 · 2025-03-28

Ravi Cheemalapati

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

APHC010290252024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3332] FRIDAY ,THE TWENTY EIGHTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI CONTEMPT CASE NO: 2919/2024 Between: Kuchipudi Usha Rani, and Others ...PETITIONER(S) AND P Naga Sailaja ...CONTEMNOR Counsel for the Petitioner(S): 1. SIVAPRASAD REDDY VENATI Counsel for the Contemnor: The Court made the following order: This contempt case is filed against the respondents for willful disobedience of orders dated 20.02.2024 passed by this Court in W.P.No.3722/2024. 2. On 09.01.2025 and 28.02.2025, there was no representation for the petitioners. Today also, there is no representation for the petitioners. 3. Sri K.M.Krishna Reddy, learned counsel for the respondents/contemnors on counter submitted that, the petitioners’ names were not found in the webland records. If the names of the sellers and extent of the property in the survey numbers are not available in the webland and without consumption of the data in the webland, 1. K M KRISHNA REDDY the CARD software restricts to proceed further for feeding the particulars of the data for registration of the agricultural property. However, the petitioners have not produced any documents so far to receive and register the same. Therefore, there is no disobedience on the part of the respondents as alleged by the petitioners and the contempt is liable to be dismissed and accordingly prayed to dismiss the contempt. 4. A perusal of the material available on record would indicate the petitioners have not produced their documents to the respondents for registration. Also the counter reveals that the petitioners name were not found in the webland records. In the said circumstances, there is no disobedience on the part of the respondents as alleged by the petitioners and the contempt is liable to be dismissed. Accordingly, the contempt case is dismissed. No costs. Miscellaneous applications, pending if any, shall stand closed. ________________________ JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI BRS