APHC010089762014 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3328] MONDAY,THE THIRTIETH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE GANNAMANENI RAMAKRISHNA PRASAD WRIT PETITION NO: 9071/2014 Between: 1. M/S MANAPPURAM FINANCE LTD.,, REP. BY ITS LEGAL MANAGER-HYDERABAD REGION, MR. S.ANANDRAJ, SON OF MR.RAJGOPAL, A 37. YEARS, OCCUPATION: MANAGER LEGAL- HYDERABAD REGION, M/S. MANAPPURAM FINANCE LIMITED, 2" FLOOR, APEX HOSPITAL COMPLEX, CENTER POINT; BOWENPALLI; SECUNDERABAD. ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE COMMISSIONER VIS MUN CORPN, Greater Visakhapatnam Municipal Corporation, VISA1CHAPATNAM ...RESPONDENT Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased toto issue appropriate Writ, direction, or order more particularly in the nature of Writ of Mandamus or any other, Writ or order/direction of a like nature declaring the impugned demand notice addressed to Mannapuram Finance Limited, V.P.Nanda Kumar, S/o. Padmanabam, NH-5, Near Bus stop, Akkireddy Palem, Visakhapatnam, as illegal, void, against the natural justice, unenforceable and contrary to the provisions of Section-42I of the Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporition. Act. and to grant such other relief and further relief as the Hon'ble High Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. 2 IA NO: 1 OF 2014(WPMP 11332 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 suspend the operation of the impugned demand notice addressed to Mannapuram Finance Limited, V.P.Nanda Kumar, S/o. Padmanabam, NH-5, Dear Bus stop, Akkireddy Palem, Visakhapatnam, pending disposal of this writ petition and pass Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. NANDIREDDY VISHNU VARDHAN REDDY Counsel for the Respondent: 1. 3 The Court made the following ORAL ORDER: On 16.03.2026 none appeared for the Writ Petitioner. Having noted the same, this Court had directed the Registry to list this matter today under the caption ‘For dismissal’. Today also, even on second call, there is no representation on behalf of the Writ Petitioner. 2. Accordingly, this Writ Petition is dismissed for non-prosecution. No order as to costs. 3. Interlocutory Applications, if any, stand closed in terms of this order. _________________________________ GANNAMANENI RAMAKRISHNA PRASAD, J Dt: 30.03.2026 Mnr 4 123 HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE GANNAMANENI RAMAKRISHNA PRASAD WRIT PETITION NO: 9071 OF 2014 Dt: 30.03.2026 Mnr