Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Andhra Pradesh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 51443 (AP)

KANDIKONDA NAGI REDDY & ANR v. ATTUNIRI RAMA KRISHNA REDDY

CMA/1222/2012 · 2025-12-19

Maheswara Rao Kuncheam, Ravi Nath Tilhari

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

APHC010514022012 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3524] SATURDAY,THE TWENTIETH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI NATH TILHARI THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE MAHESWARA RAO KUNCHEAM CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL NO: 1222/2012 Between: 1. KANDIKONDA NAGI REDDY & ANR, S/O.MUTTA REDDY, HINDU, OCC: CULTIVATION R/O.KANUMURU [V], GAMPALAGUDEM [M], KRISHNA DISTRICT. 2. KANDIKONDA PADMAVATHI, W/O.KANDIKONDA NAGI REDDY, HINDU, OCC: HOUSEWIFE R/O.KANUMURU [V], GAMPALAGUDEM [M], KRISHNA DISTRICT. ...APPELLANT(S) AND 1. ATTUNIRI RAMA KRISHNA REDDY, S/o.Venkata Reddy, Hindu, Occ: Cultivation R/o.Koduru [V], A.Koduru [M], Krishna District. ...RESPONDENT Appeal Under Section_____against ordersset aside the decree and order dated 29.10.2012 in GWOP No.338/2010 on the file of the District Judge, Krishna at Machilipatnam, and consequently dismiss the petition in GWOP No.338/2010 IA NO: 1 OF 2012(CMAMP 2337 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 suspend the decree and order dated 29.10.2012 in GWOP No.338/2010 on the file of the District Judge, Krishna at Machilipatnam, pending disposal of the main appeal Counsel for the Appellant(S): 1. NARASIMHA RAO GUDISEVA Counsel for the Respondent: 1. P NAGENDRA REDDY The Court made the following: THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI NATH TILHARI THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE MAHESWARA RAO KUNCHEAM CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL NO: 1222/2012 JUDGMENT: (per Hon’ble Sri Justice Ravi Nath Tilhari) The petition filed by the father seeking appointment as guardian of minor children and seeking custody of the minor children under Sections 7 and 10 of Guardian and Wards Act was allowed by the District Judge, Krishna, Machilipatnam. Aggrieved by the same, the present appeal was preferred by the grand-parents. 2. Sri T.Manikanta, learned counsel representing Sri Narasimha Rao Gudiseva, learned counsel for the appellants submits that during pendency of the appeal, the minor children attained majority. 3. Since the minor children now attained majority, the Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is dismissed as infructuous. No order as to costs. As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous petitions, if any pending, shall also stand closed. ____________________ RAVI NATH TILHARI,J _____________________________ MAHESWARA RAO KUNCHEAM,J Dated: 20.12.2025 AG THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI NATH TILHARI THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE MAHESWARA RAO KUNCHEAM CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL NO: 1222/2012 Dated: 20.12.2025 AG