APHC010440912017 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE THIRTY FIRST DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA THE HONOURABLE SMT WRIT PETITION N Between: 1. Mamidala Mahalakshmi about 59 Years, resident of Dr Nehru Nagar, Badavapet 1. Gutta Satyanarayana Rao about 80 Years, Occ Satyanarayanapuram Power of Attorney Holder Devadanam, Hindu, 5/A, CSI Church Street others. Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. V PADMANABHA RAO Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. SAI GANGADHAR CHAMARTY 2. A SYAM SUNDAR REDDY IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) THE THIRTY FIRST DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA AND THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE SUMATHI JAGADAM WRIT PETITION No.33927 of 2017 Mamidala Mahalakshmi, Wife of Late Babu Rao, Christian resident of Dr.No.36-8-44/26, Mattavari Veedhi Badavapet, Vijayawada, Krishna District. ...Petitioner AND Gutta Satyanarayana Rao, Son of Late Subba Rao, Hindu Occ: Business, Nageswara Rao Pantulu Road Satyanarayanapuram, Vijayawada, represented by his General Power of Attorney Holder, Matla Sudhakar, Son of Late , aged about 51 Years, Resident of Dr.No Church Street, Pajjonpet, Vijayawada, Krishna District, and ...Respondents Counsel for the Petitioner: V PADMANABHA RAO Counsel for the Respondent(S): GANGADHAR CHAMARTY A SYAM SUNDAR REDDY [3494] THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA JUSTICE SUMATHI JAGADAM Christian, aged Mattavari Veedhi, Petitioner Hindu, aged Nageswara Rao Pantulu Road, represented by his General Son of Late Resident of Dr.No.17-24- Krishna District, and Respondents 2 WP_33927_2017 The Court made the following ORDER: (per NJS, J) At the time of considering the matter, the learned counsel for the petitioner states that as the writ petitioner died, he made efforts to bring the Legal Representative(s) of the writ petitioner on record; however, his efforts proved futile. 2. Recording the same, the writ petition is dismissed as abated. However, this order does not preclude the Legal Representative(s) of the petitioner to seek recourse to Law, if they are so advised. No order as to costs. Miscellaneous petitions pending, including I.A. No.1 of 2025, shall stand closed. ____________________ NINALA JAYASURYA,J ____________________ SUMATHI JAGADAM,J January 31, 2025 vasu