APHC010590592013 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3367] THURSDAY, THE THIRTIETH DAY OF OCTOBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE V SRINIVAS I.A.No.2 of 2025 IN/AND APPEAL SUIT NO: 306 of 2013 Between: Dandu Seethamma and Others ...APPELLANT(S) AND Shaik Imam Sha and Others ...RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Appellant(S): 1. V R REDDY KOVVURI Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. S LAKSHMINARAYANA REDDY 2. KARRI MURALI KRISHNA The Court made the following: THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.SRINIVAS I.A.No.2 of 2025 IN/AND APPEAL SUIT No.306 of 2013 COMMON JUDGMENT: This appeal is filed against the Judgment and Decree dated 28.02.2013 passed in O.S.No.118 of 2007 on the file of the learned II Additional Senior Civil Judge, Nandyal, Kurnool District. 2. Today, when the matter is taken up, Sri D. Vigneshwar Reddy, learned counsel representing Sri V.R. Reddy Kovvuri, learned counsel for the appellant Nos.1 to 4/defendant Nos.1 to 4, submits that he filed I.A.No.2 of 2025 seeking permission of this Court to withdraw the present appeal. 3. Heard learned counsel for the appellant Nos.1 to 4/defendant Nos.1 to 4. No representation on behalf of the respondents. 4. The respondent Nos.5 to 10 filed counter affidavit in I.A.No.2 of 2025. Perused the counter affidavit. Originally, the suit was filed for declaration and for consequential relief of permanent injunction. The said suit was decreed by the Judgment dated 28.02.2013 in toto. Challenging the same, the defendant Nos.1 to 4 filed this appeal challenging the correctness or otherwise. Now, the respondent Nos.5 to 10, who are the defendant Nos.8 to 13, have neither filed any appeal nor cross-objections/counter-claim, but they are preventing the appellant Nos.1 to 4/defendant Nos.1 to 4, from withdrawing the appeal. However, the fact remains that the affected parties i.e., defendant Nos.1 to 4, who filed the present appeal against the Judgment and Decree dated 28.02.2013 on the file of the learned II Additional Senior Civil Judge, Nandyal, Kurnool District, are themselves seeking permission to withdraw the present appeal. Therefore, they have every right to withdraw the appeal, and such withdrawal cannot be denied in any manner. 5. In these circumstances, this Court is of the view that the appellant Nos.1 to 4/defendant Nos.1 to 4 are entitled to withdraw the present appeal. Accordingly, I.A.No.2 of 2025 is allowed. Consequently, the present appeal is dismissed as withdrawn. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. __________________ JUSTICE V.SRINIVAS Date:30.10.2025 KNN