Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Andhra Pradesh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 2111 (AP)

K.Lakshmi Devi, v. Kalyala Renamma

AS/565/2025 · 2026-07-07

Alapati Giridhar, D Ramesh

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI MAIN CASE No. A.S.No.565/2025 PROCEEDING SHEET Sl. No. DATE ORDER OFFICE NOTE 7. 07.03.2026 RNT, J & BM, J I.A.No.1 of 2025 This application has been filed to condone the delay of 90 days in representing the appeal. 2. Considering the submissions advanced by the learned counsel for the petitioners and also going through the contents of the affidavit, the cause shown is sufficient. 3. The delay is condoned. 4. I.A. is allowed. I.A.No.1 of 2026 5. This application has been filed by the petitioner/appellant No.13, seeking permission to withdraw the appeal, as the appellants and respondents have settled their family disputes through the intervention of village elders and well 2 wishers. 6. Sri Sazid Kallur, learned counsel for the appellants, submits the same. 7. I.A.No.1 of 2026 is supported by the affidavit of the petitioner/appellant No.13, namely, Kalyala Lepakshappa, submitting in para No.1 thereof that “I am also authorized to depose this affidavit on behalf of other petitioners also.” 8. I.A.No.1 of 2025, which was filed to condone the delay of 90 days in resubmitting the appeal was supported by the affidavit of petitioner/appellant No.5, namely, K.Pedda Mallappa, who also stated in para No.1 that “I am also authorized to depose this affidavit on behalf of other petitioners also.” 9. In the appeal, on 15.12.2025, this Court inter alia provided that “pending consideration of I.A.No.1 of 2025, it is provided that the demolition shall remain stayed till the next date of listing.” 10. I.A.No.1 of 2026 is partly allowed only to the extent of petitioner/appellant No.13, Kalyala Lepakshappa, keeping it pending for the rest of 3 the appellants. 11. The Appeal Suit is dismissed as withdrawn only with respect to the petitioner/appellant No.13, namely, Kalyala Lepakshappa. 12. So far as the appeal with respect to the other appellants is concerned, considering that the affidavits were filed by different petitioners, to depose on behalf of the other petitioners, we consider it to appropriate to issue notice to the rest of the appellants in I.A.No.1 of 2026. 13. The I.A.No.1 of 2026, with respect to the rest of the appellants (other than appellant No.13), shall be considered after service of notice on those appellants, as aforesaid. 14. List after four weeks. _____________ RNT, J _____________ BM, J Pab 4 5 6