APHC010316372003 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3524] MONDAY,THE SECOND 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: 1907/2003 Between: 1. KOTHARI INDUSTRIAL CORPORATION LTD, BY GPA A.SUDHAKAR RAO,DY MANAGER C/O.KOTHARI BUILDINGS, R/O.205 AEROPOLIZ VILLA,STREET NO.6, HABSIGUDA,HYDERABAD. ...APPELLANT AND 1. JAYARAM FERTILISERS, MAIN ROAD, TADEPALLIGUDEM, WEST GODAVARI DT. 2. M GOPALA KRISHNA, S/O.JAYARAMA RAO BUSINESS 3. M JAYARAMA RAO, S/O.NARASIMHA RAO BUSINESS R/O.MOUNJIPADU, TADEPALLIGUDEM, WEST GODAVARI DT. 4. M CHITTEMMA, W/O.NARASIMHA RAO BUSINESS 5. M SATYAVATHI, W/O.JAYA BUSINESS 6. M SRILATHA, W/O.GOPALAKRISHNA BSINESS R/O.TADEPALLIGUDEM, TPG,DMG. WEST GODAVARI DT. 7. S MALLIKARJUNA RAO, S/O.BALAKRISHNAIAH PVT SERVICE R/O.NIDIGALLU VILLAGE, BALAYAPALLI MANDAL, NELLORE DISTRICT. ...RESPONDENT(S): Counsel for the Appellant: 2 1. SIVAPRASAD REDDY VENATI Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. G SUNDARESAN 2. . The Court made the following: 3 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI NATH TILHARI THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE MAHESWARA RAO KUNCHEAM APPEAL SUIT NO: 1907/2003 JUDGMENT: (per Hon’ble Sri Justice Ravi Nath Tilhari) The appeal is of the year 2003. After various orders, on 24.06.2025, the adjournment was granted finally. The order reads as under: “On 17.06.2025, the following order was passed: “Sri B.Sita Ram, learned counsel appears through virtual mode and submits that Sri G.Sudarshan, learned counsel has instruction to appear in this case for respondent and prays for time to file vakalat. 2. Post on 24.06.2025.” 2. Sri B.Sita Ram, learned counsel appears for the respondent through virtual mode and submits that vakalat has been filed today in the Registry. He prays for adjournment, finally. 3. List on 08.07.2025.” 3. Thereafter also, the parties did not appear on 08.07.2025, 15.07.2025, 22.07.2025, 04.08.2025 and 28.08.2025. 4. All the aforesaid orders are being reproduced as under: “08.07.2025: Sri P.Shiva Sai Dattathreya, learned counsel representing Sri Siva Prasad Reddy Venati, learned counsel for the appellant, and Sri Y.Srinivasa Murthy, Advocate appearing for the respondent through virtual mode, submit that the possibility of resolving the disputes through mediation may be explored by the 4 respective parties and, therefore, pray for an adjournment. 2. Post the matter on 15.07.2025 15.07.2025: Learned counsel for the respondent appearing through virtual mode requested adjournment to get instructions in terms of previous order. Post next week. 22.07.2025: Sri Y.Srinivasa Murthy, learned Senior Advocate appearing for the respondent, prays for further time, to enable him to obtain instructions in terms of previous order. 2. Post the matter on 04.08.2025. 04.08.2025: At request of learned counsel for the appellant, post on 28.08.2025. 28.08.2025: Four weeks further time is granted as requested by the appellant’s counsel to prepare and file the paper book along with the English translation along with the document in the regional language. 2.List after four weeks.” 5. Today also, the request has been made for adjournment. 6. Sri Siva Prasad Reddy Venati, learned counsel for the appellant, submits that paper book has also not been filed pursuant to the order dated 28.08.2025 and expresses inability to advance the arguments. 7. We do not find any sufficient reason for grant of adjournment. The adjournment cannot be granted for mere asking and particularly 5 when the appeal is an old appeal of the year 2003 and previously on many dates accommodation was granted and finally on 24.06.2025. 8. The Appeal Suit is dismissed for want of prosecution. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, interlocutory applications pending if any, shall stand closed. _____________________ RAVI NATH TILHARI, J ______________________________ MAHESWARA RAO KUNCHEAM, J Date: 02.02.2026 Pab