IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH :: AMARAVATI TUESDAY, THE FOURTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE T.MALLIKARJUNA RAO SECOND APPEAL NO: 650 OF 2002 Second Appeal Under Section 100 CPC against the order dated against the decree and Judgment dated 10.04.2002 passed in AS No.146 of 1999 on the file court of the IV Additional District Judge, Tirupathi Chittoor District, confirming the Decree and Judgment, dated 30.08.1999 passed in OS.No. 472 of 1996 on the file of the Court of the Learned Additional Senior Civil Judge, Tirupathi Chittoor District. Between: Sri A. Chenchu Reddy S/o Chinna Venkata Reddy Aged about 79 years R/o. Akkarampally, Tirupathi Village & Mandal, Chittoor District, Andhra Pradesh. Plaintiff/Appellant/Appellant 1. The Government of Andhra Pradesh Represented by the District Collector, Chittoor District, Andhra Pradesh. 2. The Mandal Revenue Office, Tirupathi village and Mandal, Represented by the M.R.O., Holding his office at Tirupathi. Counsel for the Appellants : SRI. K BATHI REDDY Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR APPEALS The Court made the following: APHC010372512002 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3369] ¥ TUESDAY ,THE FOURTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE T. MALLIKARJUNA RAO SECOND APPEAL NO: 650/2002 Between: \ A.chenchu Reddy ...APPELLANT \ AND Dist Collector Chittoor Anr ...RESPONDENT Counsel for the Appellant: 1.KBATHI REDDY Counsel for the Respondent: 1.GP FOR APPEALS The Court made the following JUDGMENT: 1. This Second Appeal was filed by the appellant/plaintiff under Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (for short, 'C.P.C.') against the Judgment and decree, dated 10.04.2002 passed in A.S.No.146 of 1999 on the file of learned IV Additional District Judge’s Court, Tirupati, confirming the judgment and decree, dated 30.08.1999 passed in O.S.No.472 of 1996 on the file of learned I Additional Junior Civil Judge’s Court, Tirupati. Today, when the matter is taken up for hearing in the morning session, no representation on behalf of the appellant. Learned counsel for the respondents is present. The matter was subsequently passed over at 2.15 P.M. — 2. ■ In the post lunch appellant despite listing seems that the appeal. session a/so, there ' the matter the was no under the e'^nclng any interest representation on beha/f of'( caption ‘for dismissal’, it appellant Is not to prosecute with the Accordingly, the there shall be Second Appeal i costs. f^/smissed for IS rtefault. However, no order as to ^''^cellane6u& petitions pending, if ony, in this closed. appeal shall stand >■ » ■ f //TRUE COPY// To, SECTION OFFICER Chittoor Pradesh. [OUT] psr , HIGH COURT DATED:04/02/2025 ifllUNM25 I ^ . Current Section ORDER SA.No.650 of 2002 DISMISSING THE SECOND APPEAL FOR DEFAULT WITHOUT COSTS