APHC010336982012 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3459] THURSDAY, THE EIGHTEENTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE SUMATHI JAGADAM CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL NO: 406/2012 Between: 1. MAREEDU MURALI, S/O. GOPALARAO, RTC MECHANIC, C/O. RTC GARAGE, SATHUPALLI DEPOT, KHAMMAM DISTRICT, R/O. H.NO. 9-71, JAYA BAVI CENTRE, TIRUVURU VILLAGE & MANDAL KRISHNA DISTRICT. ...APPELLANT AND 1. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, ENDOWMENT DEPARTMENT, VIJAYAWADA. 2. SRI VENKATACHALA SWAMY VARI DEVASTHANAM TIRUVURU V, REP. BY ITS MANAGER, TIRUVURU (M), KRISHNA DISTRICT. ...RESPONDENT(S): Appeal Under Section_____against ordersto allow the appeal with costs and set aside the Judgement passed in OA No. 2200 of 2010 (initially Numbered as OA No. 72 of 2007 on the file of the Deputy Commissioner, Endowment Department, Kakinada), dated 17-3-2012, on the file of the AP. Endowments Tribunal, Hyderabad and grant such other relief as it deems fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. IA NO: 1 OF 2012(CMAMP 835 OF 2012 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 grant stay of eviction of the petitioner pursuant to the order in OA No. 2200 of 2010 on the file of the AP. Endowments Tribunal, Hyderabad, pending 2 JS,J C.M.A.No.406/2012 disposal of the CMA., and grant such other relief as it deems fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. IA NO: 1 OF 2013(CMAMP 848 OF 2013 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 vacate the interim orders made in CMAMP No.835/2012 dated 23.05.2012 in CMA No.406/2012 which was extended by order dated 27.06.2012 Counsel for the Appellant: 1. M/S BHARADWAJ ASSOCIATES Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR APPEALS 2. KAPPERA KOTESWARA RAO SC for Endowments,AP Region. 3 JS,J C.M.A.No.406/2012 The Court made the following JUDGMENT: No representation for the appellant. As there was no representation for the appellant on 11.07.2025, the matter was directed to be listed on 07.08.2025. On 07.08.2025, the matter was adjourned at the request made by the learned counsel for the appellant for getting latest instructions from his client. When the matter was called on 04.09.2025, there was no representation for the appellant. Hence, the matter was directed to be listed today under the caption “for dismissal”. Today when the matter is called, there is no representation for the appellant. It appears that the appellant is not interested to prosecute the case. Hence, the Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is dismissed as non-prosecution. No order as to costs. As a sequel, miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall stand closed. __________________________ JUSTICE SUMATHI JAGADAM Date: 18.09.2025 KAS