APHC010714362011 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3459] FRIDAY,THE NINETEENTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE SUMATHI JAGADAM CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL NO: 229/2011 Between: 1. CHANGALVALA DURGA BHAVANI, W/O CHANDRAMOULI HOUSE WIFE R/O D.NO 23-6-56A KOMMUVARI STREET, SATYANARAYANAPURAM, ...APPELLANT AND 1. INDRAKANTHI SESIKANTHA SARMA AND 2 OTHERS, S/O SUDHAKAR H.NO.11, AREA HOSPITALS COMPLEX, B-ZONE, RAMAKRISHNAPURAM, 2. PRATTILPATI MEENA, W/O VENKATACHALAM HOUSE WIFE R/O D.NO.23-6-6-47, KOMMUVARI STREET, SATYANARAYANAPURAM, VIJAYAWADA, 3. KUMARAJUGADDA RAJYALAKSHMI, W/O SRIKRISHNA PARAMATMA SERVICE R/O D.NO.24-10-30/1, DRONAMRAJUVARI STREET, RAMANAGAR, BAVAJIPETA, VIJAYAWADA, ...RESPONDENT(S): Appeal Under Section_____against orders IA NO: 1 OF 2011(CMAMP 465 OF 2011 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 grant injunction restrianing the respondents / defendants from interfering with the peaceful, continuous and uninterrupted possession and enjoyment of the petitioner / appellant in the plaint schedule property in any manner what so ever pending disposal of the above CMA 2 IA NO: 2 OF 2011(CMAMP 872 OF 2011 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 injunction restraining the respondents from interfering with the peaceful, continuous and uninterrupted possession and enjoyment of the petitioner in the suit schedule property in any manner whatsoever pending disposal of the CMA Counsel for the Appellant: 1. DR RADHA KRISHNA MURTHY YARLAGADDA Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. A P VENUGOPAL The Court made the following: 3 JUDGMENT: Despite the matter being listed today i.e., on 19.09.2025 under the caption ‘for Dismissal’, there is no representation for the appellant. Even on the earlier occasions, i.e., on 29.08.2025, 31.07.2025, and 11.07.2025, there was no representation for the appellant. 2. Therefore, it appears that the appellant has no interest to prosecute the case. Hence, this Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is dismissed for non-prosecution. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed. __________________________ JUSTICE SUMATHI JAGADAM 19th September, 2025 cbn 4 544 THE HON’BLE SMT. JUSTICE SUMATHI JAGADAM CMA No.229 of 2011 19th September, 2025 cbn