Neutral Citation_______________ APHC010694872016 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI [3606] WEDNESDAY, THE 30th DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE PURUSHOTAM KUMAR CHINTALAPUDI SECOND APPEAL No.110 OF 2016 Between: 1. Yedla Ramaraju (died), - 2. Yedla Nagamani, W/o. Ramaraju, aged about 28 years, Hindu, Household duties, R/o. Balighattam Village, Kothavalasa Mandal, Vizianagaram District. 3. Yedla Yerni Kumar, S/o. Late Rama Raju, aged about 17 years, being minor rep. by his mother and guardian Yedla Nagamani (2nd Appellant), R/o. Balighattam Village, Kothavalasa Mandal, Vizianagaram District. 4. Yedla Tarun, S/o. Late Rama Raju, aged about 9 years, being minor rep. by his mother and guardian Yedla Nagamani (2nd Appellant), R/o.Balighattam Village, Kothavalasa Mandal, Vizianagaram District. ...Petitioners AND 1. Karri Suri, S/o. Late Ramulu, aged bout 65 years, Hindu, cultivation, R/o. Balighattam Village, Kothavalasa Mandal, Vizianagaram District. 2 2. Adi Reddy Appala Naidu, S/o. Late China Narayana, Hindu, Cultivation, aged about 63 years, Rio. Balighattam Village, Kothavalasa Mandal, Vizianagaram District. ...Respondents Appeal under section ___________ against the Judgment passed in A.S.110/2012, dated 27-08-2015 on the file of Special Judge for Trial of Cases Under SCs & STs (POA) Act - Cum - Additional District and Sessions Judge, Vizianagaram, reversing the decree and judgment passed in O.S.No.186/2003 of Dt.29-09-2012, on the file of Junior Civil Judge, Kothavalasa. IA NO.1 OF 2016 (SAMP 293 OF 2016) 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 ad-interim injunction, restraining the Respondents from alienating the suit Schedule Property in O.S. 186/2003 on the file of Juniior Civil Judge, Kothavalasa. IA NO.2 OF 2016 (SAMP 2732 OF 2016) 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 Appellants : RAYAPROLU SRIKANTH Counsel for the Respondents: T. S. PRAVEEN KUMAR The Court made the following: 3 JUDGMENT: Sri Rayaprolu Srikanth, learned counsel for the appellants, is present and reports that he filed a Memo, dated 25.09.2026, in the Registry, which reads as follows: “It is submitted that, I have got instructions from Appellants to withdraw the above S.A. No.110/2016 as the mater is compromised out of court, as per the information given by them. Hence this Hon’ble court pleased to dismiss the S.A. No.110/2016 as withdrawn.” Recording the aforesaid Memo, as the matter apears to have been compromised out of Court betwen the parties, the Second Appeal is dismissed as withdrawn. No order as to costs. As a sequel, pending Miscellaneous Applications, if any, shall stand closed. Interim order, granted earlier, if any, shall stand vacated. ___________________________________________ JUSTICE PURUSHOTTAM KUMAR CHINTALAPUDI Date:30.09.2026 DSH Whether the order is: Speaking √ Reasoned Reportable Non-Reportable √