APHC010157262004 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3524] TUESDAY, THE TENTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI NATH TILHARI THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE MAHESWARA RAO KUNCHEAM APPEAL SUIT NO: 906/2004 Between: 1. MOHAMMED VIKAR AHMED, S/O.MD.KHADARVALI CONDUCTOR, APSRTC R/o. VIDYADHARAPURAM, VIJAYAWADA-12. ...APPELLANT AND 1. PEERU MABEE, W/o. Md. Vikar Ahmed Behind Milk Hospital, Ganjibazar Choutra, Guntur. ...RESPONDENT A.S. against O.S.No.66/99, dated 7/1/04, on the file of Family Court, Vijayawada. IA NO: 1 OF 2007(ASMP 478 OF 2007 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 expedite the AS No.906/2004 for hearing and post the AS No.906/2004 for hearing in the month of March,2007 Counsel for the Appellant: 1. RAVI KUMAR TOLETY Counsel for the Respondent: 1. SYED GHOUSE BASHA 2 The Court made the following: JUDGMENT: (per Hon’ble Sri Justice Maheswara Rao Kuncheam) Plaintiff husband filed petition in O.S.No.66 of 1999 under Section 17 of the Family Courts Act, on the file of Family Court at Vijayawada, for declaration of marriage as null and void by granting divorce., was dismissed vide orders dated 07.01.2004. Challenging the said dismissal order, the present appeal is filed by the husband. 2. As the learned counsel for the appellant is no more, this Court, on 11.12.2025, directed the Registry to issue notice to the appellant. Consequently, the notice issued by the Registry is returned as unserved with the following endorsement: “For want of Door Number as per postal endorsement.” 3. Notice is deemed served as the same was sent to the correct address as mentioned in the cause title in the appeal. 4. The appeal was instituted in the year 2004 and despite the caution of this Court in the causelist that the old matters may not be adjourned, none appeared for the appellant. 5. In view of the aforesaid, the appeal is dismissed for non-prosecution. 6. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, all pending applications shall stand closed. ___________________ RAVI NATH TILHARI, J _____________________________ MAHESWARA RAO KUNCHEAM, J GVK 3 65 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI NATH TILHARI AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE MAHESWARA RAO KUNCHEAM CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL No.906 of 2004 Dt. 10.02.2026 GVK