1 (RNT,J & MRK,J A.S. NO.633 OF 2005) APHC010161952005 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3524] TUESDAY,THE TWENTIETH DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI NATH TILHARI THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE MAHESWARA RAO KUNCHEAM APPEAL SUIT NO: 633/2005 Between: 1. KANTAMANI RATNA KUMAR, S/O.K.V.NARAYANA H.NO.9-19-39, C.B.M. COMPOUND, WALTAIR UPLANDS, VISAKHAPATNAM- 530003. ...APPELLANT AND 1. DR MUDDU VENKATA RAMANA RAO, S/o. Late Lakshmana Murthy 5- 4-11, SBI Colony, Punyapu Street, Srikakulam-001 ...RESPONDENT Appeal against the Judgment and decree passed in O.S.No.157 of 1999 dated 31.3.2005 on the file of the II Additional District Judge, Visakhapatnam. IA NO: 1 OF 2005(ASMP 10933 OF 2005 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 IA NO: 2 OF 2005(ASMP 19012 OF 2005 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 Appellant: 2 (RNT,J & MRK,J A.S. NO.633 OF 2005) 1. C V MOHAN REDDY Counsel for the Respondent: 1. P RAJAGOPAL RAO 2. The Court made the following: JUDGMENT:- (per Hon’ble Sri Justice Ravi Nath Tilhari) On 10.03.2025, the following order was passed : “This appeal was filed by the plaintiff challenging the judgment and decree dated 31.03.2005 dismissing O.S.No.157 of 1999 which was for Specific Performance of Contract of Sale. 2. The suit was dismissed by the II Additional District Judge, Vijayanagaram in O.S.No.157 of 1999. 3. The appeal was admitted on 20.10.2005. 4. Ms. Nafisa, learned counsel representing learned counsel for the appellant appears through virtual mode and seeks adjournment on the ground that the appeal was listed after long time. 5. However granting opportunity, list after three (3) weeks in the weekly list...” 2. Today Ms.Nafisa, learned counsel representing Sri C.V.Mohan Reddy, learned counsel for the appellant, appearing through virtual mode, 3 (RNT,J & MRK,J A.S. NO.633 OF 2005) submits that she has no instructions from the appellant, and as such, she is not in a position to argue the matter. 3. In view of the above, the Appeal Suit is dismissed “for want of prosecution”. No order as to costs. As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous petitions, if any pending, shall also stand closed. ____________________ RAVI NATH TILHARI, J ______________________________ MAHESWARA RAO KUNCHEAM, J Date : 20.01.2026. JLV/RPD. 4 (RNT,J & MRK,J A.S. NO.633 OF 2005) THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI NATH TILHARI AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE MAHESWARA RAO KUNCHEAM (DISMISSED FOR WANT OF PROSECUTION) APPEAL SUIT NO: 633 of 2005 Date: 20.01.2026 JLV/RPD.