APHC010566902017 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3397] WEDNESDAY, THE FIFTH DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENUTHURUMALLI GOPALA KRISHNA RAO SECOND APPEAL NO: 187/2017 Between: 1. PANDI PUSHPALATHA, PRAKASAM DIST, W/O. LATE L ,5HAKARA RAO, 45 YEARS, CHRISTIAN, HOUSEWIFE, D.NO.51-1- 125(B),KABADIPALEM, ONGOLE ...APPELLANT AND 1. PANDI JYOTHI PRAKASAM DIST 5 OTHERS, W/O. LATE PRABHAKARA RAO, 32 YEARS, HINDU, HOUSEWIFE, 2. PANDI VIJAYA RANI, D/O. LATE PRABHAKARA RAO 14 YEARS. 3. PANDI SUDHA RANI, D/O. LATE PRABHAKARA RAO, 9 YEARS. 4. PANDI SANDHYA RANI, D/O. LATE PRABHAKARA RAO, 5 YEARS. DEFENDANTS 2 TO 4 ARE BUNG MINORS REP.BY THEIR MOTHER 1ST PETITIONER AS GUARDIAN AND NEXT FRIEND. ALL ARE HINDUS, R/O. THIRUVENGALAPILLAI STREET, NEAR ELEPHANT TREE, ONCOLE. 5. THE PRL DISTRICT JUDGE, (SUIT NOT PRESSED) PRAKASAM DISTRICT, ONGLE. 6. THE COMMISSIONER, ACCOUNTANT GENERAL OFFICE, HYDERABAD ...RESPONDENT(S): Appeal under section ___________ against orders to set aside the remand the case to the Senior Civil Judge Court , Addanki by the Appellate Court III Addl. District Judge , Ongole in As 266/2009 28.10.2016 IA NO: 2 OF 2017(SAMP 7825 OF 2017 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 Counsel for the Appellant: 1. KAUSHIK KUMBHAJADALA Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. P RAJASEKHAR THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.GOPALA KRISHNA RAO SECOND APPEAL No.187 of 2017 JUDGMENT: When the matter was listed on the earlier occasions i.e., on 24.10.2025 and 31.10.2025, there was no representation on behalf of the appellant and the matter was directed to be posted today, under the caption ‘For Dismissal’. 2. Today when the matter is taken up for hearing, learned counsel representing on behalf of the respondents is alone present. Though the matter is listed under the caption ‘For Dismissal’, there is no representation on behalf of the appellant. It seems that the appellant is not inclined to prosecute the appeal. 3. Therefore, the Second Appeal is dismissed for non-prosecution. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions, if any pending, shall stand closed. _______________________________ JUSTICE V.GOPALA KRISHNA RAO Date: 05.11.2025 CVD/KS