P.KRISHNA GANGA RAJU.,HYD 2 OTHERS v. M.D.,A.P.S.FINANCIAL CORP.,HYD & 4
WP/19989/2003 · 2025-07-17
Gannamaneni Ramakrishna Prasad
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 8336 (AP) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 8336 (AP) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
APHC010089272003
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3328] FRIDAY, THE EIGHTEENTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE GANNAMANENI RAMAKRISHNA PRASAD WRIT PETITION NO: 19989/2003 Between:
1. P.KRISHNA GANGA RAJU, HYD 2 OTHERS, S/O PEDDASURAPA RAJU R/O HYDERABAD.
2. V.SITARAMA RAJU, S/O SESHAM RAJU R/O VIJAYAWADA.
3. M.SUBBA RAJU, S/O VENKATA KRISHNAM RAJU R/O VIJAYAWADA.
...PETITIONER(S) AND
1. M D A P S FINANCIAL CORP HYD 4, HYDERABAD, REP.BY IT’S MANAGING DIRECTOR.
2. THE BRANCH MANAGER, A.P.STATE FINANCIAL CORPORATION, VIJAYAWADA, KRISHNA DISTRICT.
3. M/S RAASI CHEMICALS LIMITED, (PREVIOUSLY GREEN LAND CHEMICALS LTD) REP.BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR, SRI K.S.N.RAJU FLAT NO.503, I FLOOR. MATA CEMENTS LTD., TOPAZ BUILDINGS., SOMAJIGUDA., HYDERABAD.
4. SRI K S N RAJU, S/O NARASIMHA RAJU BUSINESS FLAT NO.503., I FLOOR, MATA CEMENTS LTD., TOPAZ BUILDINGS., SOMAJIGUDA., HYDERABAD.
5. DR R V RAJU, S/O VENKATA NARASIMHA RAJU BUSINESS H.NO.8- 2-120/112/A/9., ROAD NO.9., JUBILEE HILLS., NEAR NOBLE SCHOOL., HYDERABAD
...RESPONDENT(S): Counsel for the Petitioner(S):
2
1. V JAGAPATHI Counsel for the Respondent(S):
1. G R SUDHAKAR
2. KURITI BHASKARA RAO The Court made the following:
ORAL ORDER:
When this Writ Petition was listed on 15.07.2025, there was no representation on behalf of the Petitioner. This Court had directed the matter to be listed today under the caption ‘For Dismissal’. Today also, there is no representation on behalf of the Petitioner.
2. This matter is of the year 2003 and, therefore, this Court is of the opinion that no useful purpose would be served by keeping it pending on the file of this Court inasmuch as the Writ Petitioner has not evinced any interest in prosecuting this Writ Petition.
3. Accordingly, this Writ Petition is dismissed for Non-prosecution. No order as to costs.
4. However, there shall be a direction to the Registry to preserve the record for a period of twelve (12) weeks from today in order to enable the parties to file an appropriate Application for Restoration, if the Writ Petitioner is of the opinion that the cause of action still survives.
5. If such Application is not filed within the fixed time, the Registry is at liberty to destroy the record four (04) weeks after the expiry of the said twelve (12) weeks period.
6. Interlocutory Applications, if any, stand closed in terms of this order.
______________________________________ GANNAMANENI RAMAKRISHNA PRASAD, J Dt: 18.07.2025 DSV