Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Andhra Pradesh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 35829 (AP)

PASUPULETI NAGA VENAKTA SATYANARAYANA v. PASUPULETI @ GARIKIPATI RAMA DEVI @ MARY

CMA/2/2011 · 2025-08-12

Ninala Jayasurya, Tuhin Kumar Gedela

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

•A ^ APHC010575712011 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI 8-, -c»l WEDNESDAY,THE THIRTEENTH DAY OF AUGUST |g \J|| TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE \ PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA PI A/ AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE TUHIN KUMAR GEDELA CIVIL MISCELLANEOUSAPPEAL NO: 2 OF 2011 Appeal Under Section 28 of Hindu Marriage Act, against the orders and decree passed in O.P. No. 45 of 2007, d 20.7.2010 on the file Civil Judge (Senior Division), Tadepalligudem. Between: Pasupuleti Naga Venakta Satyanarayana, S/o.Dharma Raju, Aged 28 years, R/o.Avupadu Village, Nallajerla Mandal, Tadepalligudem, West Godavari District ...Appellant AND Pasupuleti @ Garikipati Rama Devi @ Mary, W/o. Satyanarayana D/o.Garikapati Venkteswara Rao, Aged 23 years Nallajerla Mandal, Tadepalligudem, West Godavari District R/o.Avupadu Village, ...Respondent Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI K S MURTHY Counsel for the Respondent: SRI K JYOTHI PRASAD The Court made the following order: APHC010575712011 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI WEDNESDAY, THE THIRTEENTH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE TUHIN KUMAR GEDELA CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL No.2 OF 2011 Between: Pasupuleti Naga Venkata Satyanarayana, S/o.Dharma Raju, Aged 28 years, R/o.Avupadu Village, Nallajerla Mandal, Tadepalligudem, West Godavari District, ...Appellant AND Pasupuleti @ Garikapati Rama Devi @ Mary, W/o.Satyanarayana, D/o.Garikapati Venkateswara Rao, Aged 23 years, R/o.Avupadu Village Nallajerla Mandal, Tadepalligudem, West Godavari District. Mr.K.S.Murthy Mr.K.Jyothi Prasad The Court made the following JUDGMENT: (per Hon’ble NJS,J) At the time of considering the matter, Mr.K.Guru Raja, learned Advocate representing on behalf of the learned counsel for the appellant submits that the matter has become infructuous. ...Respondent Counsel for the Appellant Counsel for the Respondent : Recording the same, the CMA is dismissed as infructuous. No order as to costs. Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. 2. Sd/- E KAMESWARA RAO JOINT REGISTRAR ,1 /(TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER To, The Civil Judge (Senior Division), Tadepalligudem. (with records) One CC to Sri K S Murthy Advocate [OPUC] One CC to Sri K Jyothi Prasad Advocate [OPUC] The V R Section, Section Officer, High Court of Andhra Pradesh. Two CD Copies 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. PR (gsg) F HIGH COURT DATED: 13/08/2025 JUDGMENT CMA NO. 2 OF 2011 g( 17 SEP 2025 ■ X> ,C3 ; Cfi’ rrentSectio * 1 DISMISSING THE APPEAL AS INFRUCTUOUS