Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Andhra Pradesh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 3402 (AP)

Director General of Post Offices v. Penaka Vamsee

CRP/73/2025 · 2025-01-10

B S Bhanumathi

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

APHC010016172025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3311] FRIDAY ,THE TENTH DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MS JUSTICE B S BHANUMATHI CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO: 73/2025 Between: Director General Of Post Offices and Others ...PETITIONER(S) AND Penaka Vamsee ...RESPONDENT Counsel for the Petitioner(S): 1. Pasala Ponna Rao, Deputy Solicitor General of India Counsel for the Respondent: 1. The Court made the following: ORDER: This revision petition is filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India against the order dated 02.01.2025 in ASCR.No.9091 of 2024 on the file of the Court of the Principal District Judge and Sessions Judge, Nellore directing return of the file, giving 7 days time for resubmission with legal provision, if any about the maintainability of appeal against the preliminary decree after passing the final decree since it is not maintainable as per Section 97 of CPC. 2. A reading of the impugned order indicates that when the matter was called on bench, there was no representation for both the parties, and hence, the said appeal was returned to answer the same objection. 2 BSB, J C.R.P.No.73 of 2025 3. Instead of representing the appeal with answer to the objection, this revision petition was filed contending that the objection is not maintainable. As can be seen from the impugned order, it was not the final decision of the Court as the appeal was not heard. Therefore, the appellate Court directed only for return of the appeal, still keeping it open to the appellant to answer the objection. 4. As such, the revision petition is disposed of directing the revision petitioners to represent the appeal before the appellate Court answering the objection and if necessary, with a request to call the matter before bench and thereafter make submissions to the Court as to pass an order on merit about the maintainability. No order as to costs. Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending shall stand closed, and interlocutory orders, if any, pending shall stand vacated. __________________ B.S. BHANUMATHI, J Date:10.01.2025 K M S 3 BSB, J C.R.P.No.73 of 2025 201 THE HONOURABLE MS JUSTICE B S BHANUMATHI CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO: 73/2025 Dated: 10.01.2025 K M S