APHC010393832021 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI B THURSDAY, THE SEVENTH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO FAMILY COURT APPEAL NO: 12 OF 2022 Appeal under section 19 of family Court Act, 1984, Aggrieved by the and Decree passed and F.C.O.P. No. 61/2014, on the file of Judge, Additional Family Court,Visakhapatnam, dated 26.02.2020. Between: Sri Karri Venkata Satyanarayana Narsinha Rao, S/o K. Nooka Raju, Hindu, aged about 58 years. Residence of Flat No. 502, Sri Joshna Enclave, B.S. Layout, Seethammadhara,Visakhapatnam and working as Joint Manager, Technicial Department, Dredging Corporation of India, Visakhapatnam. ...Petitioner AND Smt Karri Lakshmi Sree Devi, W/o Karri Venkata Satyanarayana Narsinga Rao, Hindu, Housewife, aged about 42 years, D/o G. Sarveswara Rao, Residing at H.No. C-460, NGOs Colony, Vanasthalipuram, Ranga Reddy District, Telangana State. ...Respondent % i’ Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI. INENI VENKATA PRASAD Counsel for the Respondent: — The Court made the following Judgment: N APHC010393832021 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE TWENTY FIFTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE [3526] B PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO FAMILY COURT APPEAL No.12 of 2022 Between: Sri Karri Venkata Satyanarayana Narsinga Rao, S/o.K.Nooka Raju, Hindu, aged 58 years. Resident of Flat No.502, Sri Joshna Enclave, B.S.Layout, Seethammadhara, Visakhapatnam and working as Joint- Manager, Technical Department, Dredging Corporation of India, Visakhapatnam. ...Appellant X X AND Smt.Karri Lakshmi Sree Devi, W/o.Karri Venkata Satyanarayana Narsinga Rao, Hindu, Housewife, Aged 42 years, D/o.G.Sarveswara Rao, Residing at H.No.C-460, NGOs’ Colony, Vanasthalipuram Ranga Reddy District, Telangana State . ...Respondent Mr.lneni Venkata Prasad Counsel for the Appellant Counsel for the Respondent : The Court made the following JUDGMENT: (per NJS,J) Heard learned counsel for the appellant, who made submissions to sustain the order under appeal. 2 2. The learned Judge, Additional the order dated respondent-wife and rejected F.C.O.P. No 61 appellant-husband seeking dissolution territorial jurisdiction. Family Court, Visakhapatnam, vide 26.2.2020. allowed the application filed by the of 2014 filed by the of the marriage, on the ground of The learned Family Court Judge recorded the admission made by the appellant conclusion on the basis of the who was no ground to examined as P.W.1. interfere with the In view of the same, this Court see appeal. order under submission made by the learned granted to the appellant to work However, considering the counsel for the appellant, out remedies i liberty is >n accordance with law. 3. Accordingly, the Family Court Appeal! costs. Miscellaneous Registry is directed to counsel for the appellant. IS dismissed. No order as to any, shall stand closed, original documents to the learned petitions pending, if return the ori Sd/- S.V.S.R.MURTHY / JOINT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// // §6 SECTION OFFICER To, 1. The Additional Family Court, Visakhapatnam. (with records) 2. One CC to Sri. Ineni Venkata Prasad, Advocate [OPUC] 3. The Section Officer, V.R Section, High Court of Andhra Pradesh. 4. Two CD Copies PR vna HIGH COURT 1 DATED:07/08/2025 JUDGMENT FCA NO. 12 OF 2022 ^ 2 5 SEP 2025 )|) rrentSectita.-^^ DISMISSING THE APPEAL WITHOUT COSTS