APHC010577932012 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3459] THURSDAY, THE THIRTEENTH DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE SUMATHI JAGADAM CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL NO: 923/2012 Between: 1. VYSYARAJU APPA RAO, S/O.LATE ABBAI RAJU R/O.MAIN ROAD, SOMPETA, SRIKAKULAM DISTRICT. ...APPELLANT AND 1. THE ENDOWMETNS DDEPARTMENTS ANR, ENDOWMENTS DEPARTMENT O/O.SRIKAKULAM. 2. SRI KODANDA RAMA SWAMY TEMPLE, REP BY ITS EXECUTIVE OFFICER O/O.SOMPETA, SRIKAKULAM DISTRICT. ...RESPONDENT(S): Appeal Under Section_____against ordersset aside the order and decree dated 15.06.20212 in OA No.l1577/2010 passed by AP Endowments Tribunal at Hyderabad, in the interest of justice IA NO: 1 OF 2012(CMAMP 1732 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 thee operation of order and decree dated 15.06.20212 in OA No.l1577/2010 passed by AP Endowments Tribunal at Hyderabad, pending final dispsoal of main apeal in the alternative to direct the respondents 1 and 2 not evict the petitioner/appellant from the schedule house situated in Survery No.257/5b measuring East - West 81 feet and south - North 11.50 feet at Sompeta Village, in the interest of justice and equity 2 JS,J W.P.No.923/2012 IA NO: 1 OF 2014(CMAMP 510 OF 2014 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 vacate the interim order dated: 7-9-2012 passed in CMAMP NO. 1732/2012 in CMA NO. 923/2012 and pass Counsel for the Appellant: 1. K MANIK PRABHU Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. CHINTAPALLI SRINIVAS 2. . 3 JS,J W.P.No.923/2012 The Court made the following JUDGMENT: Though the matter was adjourned on 18.07.2025 and 29.08.2025, there was no representation on behalf of the learned counsel for the appellant. Hence, the matter was directed to be listed on 19.09.2025. Even on that day, there is no representation for the appellant. Therefore, 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 learned counsel for the appellant is not interested to prosecute the case. Hence, the Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is dismissed as non-prosecution. There shall be no order as to costs. Interim order granted earlier shall stand vacated. As a sequel, miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall stand closed. __________________________________ JUSTICE SUMATHI JAGADAM Dated: 13.11.2025 KAS 4 JS,J W.P.No.923/2012 228 THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE SUMATHI JAGADAM CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL NO: 923/2012 Dated: 13.11.2025 KAS