Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Andhra Pradesh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 32389 (AP)

SMT. RAYA RAMULAMMA, VISAKHAPATNAM & 2 OTHRS v. SRI A. VENKATA RAMANA, VISAKHAPATNAM & ANO

CMA/992/2013 · 2025-07-23

Sumathi Jagadam

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

APHC010477682013 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3459] THURSDAY, THE TWENTY FOURTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY-FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE SUMATHI JAGADAM CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL NO: 992/2013 Between: 1. SMT. RAYA RAMULAMMA, VISAKHAPATNAM & 2 OTHRS, W/O.LATE RAMUNAIDU OCC: HOUSE WIFE NAGAVARAM (V) MUNAGAPAKA (M) VISAKHAPATNAM DISTRICT 2. KUM. RAYA MANGA, D/O.LATE RAMUNAIDU OCC: HOUSE WIFE NAGAVARAM (V) MUNAGAPAKA (M) VISAKHAPATNAM DISTRICT 3. SMT. SALAPU KALYANI, W/O. NARASINGA RAO OCC: HOUSE WIFE NAGAVARAM (V) MUNAGAPAKA (M) VISAKHAPATNAM DISTRICT ...APPELLANT(S) AND 1. SRI A VENKATA RAMANA VISAKHAPATNAM ANO, S/O. NOOK RAJU NAGAVARAM (V) VADRAPALLI (PO) MUNAGAPAKA (M) VISAKHAPATNAM DISTRICT OWNER OF THE TRACTOR & TRAILER BEARING NO. AP 31 AR 6369 AP 31 Y 6493 2. SHRI RAM GENERAL INSURANCE CO LTD, REP. BY ITS LEGAL MANAGER BRANCH OFFICE MVP COLONY VISAKHAPATNAM DISTRICT ...RESPONDENT(S): Appeal underSection against ordersto allow this appeal and enhanced the compensation otherwise the appellants faced lot of troubles great hardship and injury. IA NO: 1 OF 2013(CMAMP 86 OF 2013 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to condone the delay of 111 days in representation in CMA SR No. 36309 of 2012 on the file of This Hon'ble Court and pass IA NO: 2 OF 2013(CMAMP 173 OF 2013 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to condone the delay of 30 days in presentation in CMASR No. of 2012 on the file of This Hon'ble Court and pass Counsel for the Appellant(S): 1. JAYANTI S C SEKHAR Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. BURMA CHAKRAPANI The Court made the following: JUDGMENT: Learned counsel for the appellant submits no further orders are required in this case and therefore, it may be closed. Recording the above submission, the present Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is closed. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, miscellaneous pending applications, if any, shall stand closed. __________________________ SUMATHI JAGADAM, J Dated: 24.07.2025 CVD