Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Andhra Pradesh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 48661 (AP)

KOMATLA VENKATA RAJESH REDDY v. KOMATLA DHANVIK KRISHNA REDDY

CRLRC/558/2025 · 2025-09-23

Y Lakshmana Rao

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

APHC010225102025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3521] WEDNESDAY,THE TWENTY FOURTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO CRIMINAL REVISION CASE NO: 558/2025 Between: 1.KOMATLA VENKATA RAJESH REDDY, S/O. SIVA RAMA REDDY, AGED ABOUT. 36 YEARS, OCC. STUDENT , R/O. FLAT NO.56, AMULYA TOWERS, SAIBABA ROAD, MAIN ROAD, CHANDRAMOULI NAGAR, GUNTUR. ...PETITIONER AND 1.KOMATLA DHANVIK KRISHNA REDDY, S/O. KOMATIA VENKATA RAJESH REDDY, OCC. STUDENT AGED ABOUT. 8 YEARS, BEING A MINOR REP. BY NATURAL GUARDIAN. I.E., MOTHER, KOMATIA @ YALLUTURI SIVA ROJA, W/O. KOMTIA VENKATA RAJESH REDDY, AGED ABOUT. 34 YEARS, OCC. NEURO DOCTOR, FOR STUDIES AT PRESENT RESIDING AT NO.4, SRIRAM NAGAR, 1ST STREET, PERAMBUR, CHENNAI, PERMANENT RESIDING AT D.NO.4-5-92/10, 5TH LANE. KORETAPADU, GUNTUR. RESPONDENT/PETITIONER 2.THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP BY ITS PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT AT AMARAVATHIFOR THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH. ...RESPONDENT(S): Counsel for the Petitioner: 1.V R REDDY KOVVURI Counsel for the Respondent(S): 2 1.RATAN MOHAN MEDIDA 2.PUBLIC PROSECUTOR The Court made the following: ORDER: Petitioner and natural guardian of Respondent No.1 are present. 2. I.A.No.3 of 2025 is filed to permit the Petitioner to compromise the case with Respondent No.1. Both parties have filed joint memo and also the affidavits signed by both parties along with their respective counsel. 3. An amount of Rs.70,00,000/- in kind of cheque was tendered by the Petitioner to the natural guardian of Respondent No.1 towards full and final settlement for the maintenance of Respondent No.1. The natural guardian of Respondent No.1 has agreed for that settlement. 4. In view of the compromise effected in between the Petitioner and Respondent No.1, the Criminal Revision Case is disposed of as compromised. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, interlocutory applications, if any pending, shall stand closed. _________________________ DR. Y. LAKSHMANA RAO, J Date: 24.09.2025 VTS