Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Andhra Pradesh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 42814 (AP)

KOTTALAPALLI MUNIRA BAGUM @ KOPPUGANTI MUNEERA BEGUM v. K KHASIM RAZVI

CRP/2224/2025 · 2025-11-13

K Sreenivasa Reddy

Original Suitbody2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

APHC010453522025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3327] FRIDAY, THE FOURTEENTH DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K SREENIVASA REDDY CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO: 2224/2025 Between: 1. KOTTALAPALLI MUNIRA BAGUM @ KOPPUGANTI MUNEERA BEGUM, W/O KOTTAPALLI HASAN SAB, AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS, R/O D.NO.3/173-B, KHASIMSAB COLONY, CHENNAI ROAD, BUDDAYAPALLI POST, KADAPA CITY, Y.S.R. KADAPA DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER AND 1. K KHASIM RAZVI, S/o Chinna Khasim Sab, Aged about 35 years, L.I.C. Agent, R/o D.N0.38/173-A, Chennai Road, Buddayapalli Post, Kadapa City, Y.S.R. Kadapa District. ...RESPONDENT Petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India,praying that in the circumstances stated in the grounds filed herein,the High Court may be pleased to SET ASIDE the order dt.10-09- 2024 passed in I.A.No. 1210/2022 in O.S.No.1102/2021 on the file of Hon'ble III Additional Civil Judge (Junior Division), Kadapa and allow the I.A.No. 1210/2022 and pass IA NO: 1 OF 2025 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 STAY all further proceedings in O.S.No.1102/2021 on the file of Hon’ble III Additional Civil Judge (Junior Division), Kadapa during pendency of this CRP and pass Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. A SYAM SUNDAR REDDY Counsel for the Respondent: 1. M SIVA JYOTHI The Court made the following: O R D E R The Revision Petitioner/plaintiff filed the present Revision Petition, challenging the Order, dated 10.09.2024 passed in I.A.No.1210 of 2022 in O.S.No.1102 of 2021 by the learned III Additional Civil Judge (Junior Division), Kadapa, whereby and whereunder, application filed under Order VI Rule 17 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, was dismissed. 2. Today, when the matter is taken up for hearing, Sri A.Syam Sundar Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the matter has become infructuous, as both parties settled the dispute outside the Court and therefore, no orders are required to be passed in the present Revision Petition. 3. Recording the said submission, the Civil Revision Petition is dismissed as infructuous. No costs. 4. It is needless to mention that the interim stay order, dated 09.09.2025 passed by this Court in I.A.No.1 of 2025 in the present Revision Petition, would automatically stands vacated. 5. As a sequel, miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall stand closed. JUSTICE K.SREENIVASA REDDY 14th November, 2025 DNB