M/s. Teja Developers v. The Greater Visakhapatnam Municipal Corporation
WP/35358/2013 · 2026-03-09
Gannamaneni Ramakrishna Prasad
body2026
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 24072 (AP) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 24072 (AP) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
1
APHC010468742013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3328] TUESDAY,THE TENTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE GANNAMANENI RAMAKRISHNA PRASAD WRIT PETITION NO: 35358/2013 Between:
1. M/S. TEJA DEVELOPERS, REP. BY ITS MANAGING PARTNER, D.
BALIREDDY, S/O. LATE MARRI REDDY, HINDU, AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS, OCC: BUSINESS,R/O. D.NO. 6-26/30, R.H.B- 30,RAMADURGA RESIDENCY, MARIKIVALASA, PARADESIPALEM VILLAGE, BHEEMILI MANDAL, VISAKHAPATNAM DISTRICT.
...PETITIONER AND
1. THE GREATER VISAKHAPATNAM MUNICIPAL CORPORATION, REP. BY ITS COMMISSIONER AT VISAKHAPATNAM, VISAKHAPATNAM DISTRICT
2. M/S ASCEND INFRA PROJECTS, REP. BY ITS MANAGING PARTNER AJAY REDDY, OFFICE AT D-3, B.R'S EMPIRE, 4-21-31/3, PEDAWALTAIR, VISAKHAPATNAM, VISAKHAPATNAM DISTRICT
...RESPONDENT(S): Counsel for the Petitioner:
1. K R KOTESWARA RAO Counsel for the Respondent(S):
1. S LAKSHMINARAYANA REDDY(SC FOR GVMC)
2. SURESH KUMAR PUSARLA
2
The Court made the following:
ORAL ORDER:
Sri K. Nagendra Reddy, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of Sri K.R. Koteswara Rao, learned Counsel for the Writ Petitioner, on instructions, submits that the cause in the present Writ Petition does not survive.
2. Having so recorded, this Writ Petition is disposed of as having become infructuous. No order as to costs. 3 Interlocutory Applications, if any, stand closed in terms of this order.
______________________________________ GANNAMANENI RAMAKRISHNA PRASAD, J Dt:10.03.2026 Vns