Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Andhra Pradesh · body

2026 DAILYLAW 24088 (AP)

DOKALA BALAGANGADHAR TILAK (DIED) v. DUSA AUDINARAYANA RAO (DIED)

CRP/4272/2018 · 2026-03-10

Maheswara Rao Kuncheam

Original Suitbody2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

1 APHC010474682018 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3504] WEDNESDAY,THE ELEVENTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE MAHESWARA RAO KUNCHEAM CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO: 4272/2018 Between: 1. DOKALA BALAGANGADHAR TILAK (DIED), PROP- SRI VIJAYA KRISHNA AGRICULTURAL INDUSTRIES (DIED) 2. DOKALA PARVATHI,, PROP- SRI VIJAYA KRISHNA AGRO INDUSTRIES, W/O LATE BALAGANGADHARA TILAK, AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS, BUSINESS, PROP- SRI VIJAYA KRISHNA AGRO AND AUTO SERVICES, RAMA LAKSHMANA JUNCTION, GT ROAD, SRIKAKULAM. 3. DOKALA KRISHNA PRASAD,, S/O LATE BALA GANGADHARA TILAK, HINDU, AGED 38 YEARS, BUSINESS, R/O 3-2-18, SRI VISAKHA A COLONY, GT ROAD, RAMALAKSHMANA JUNCTION, SRIKAKULAM. 4. DOKALA VIJAYA KUMAR,, S/O LATE BALA GANGADHARA TILAK, HINDU, AGED 37 YEARS, BUSINESS, R/O 3-2-18, SRI VISAKHA A COLONY, GT ROAD, RAMALAKSHMANA JUNCTION, SRIKAKULAM ...PETITIONER(S) AND 1. DUSA AUDINARAYANA RAO DIED, SRIKAKULAM 2. DUSA SAROJINI RAMAYAMMA DIED, SRIKAKULAM 3. DUSA SAHITYA BALARAM, ADOPTED SON OF DUSA 2 AUDINARAYANA, HINDU, AGED 19 YEARS, STUDENT, R/O 19- 34/24/A AKKAYYAPALEM, VISAKHAPATNAM, TEMPORARILY RESIDING AT VISAKHA B COLONY, SRIKAKULAM ...RESPONDENT(S): Petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, praying that in the circumstances stated in the grounds filed herein, the High Court may be pleased to allow the CRP by setting aside the order and decretal order in I.A.No.159 of 2018 in O.S.No. 15 of 243 on the file of Judge, Family Court- cum-III Additional District Judge, Srikakulam dated-12-04-2018 and pass IA NO: 1 OF 2018 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 stay all further proceedings in OS.NO.15/2013 on the file of the Judge, Family court-cum-III Additional District Judge, Srikakulam pending disposal of the above CRP and pass Counsel for the Petitioner(S): 1. K VENKAT RAO Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. VINOD KUMAR TARLADA 2. The Court made the following: 3 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE MAHESWARA RAO KUNCHEAM CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO: 4272 of 2018 ORDER:- This Civil Revision Petition has been filed under Article 227 of Constitution of India, challenging the order and decretal order dated 12.04.2018 in I.A.No.159 of 2018 in O.S.No.15 of 2013 on the file of Judge, Family Court-cum-III Additional District Judge, Srikakulam. 2. When the matter is taken up for hearing, Sri P.Venkata Rao, learned counsel for the petitioners, submits that the main suit in O.S.No.15 of 2013 was dismissed with costs on 28.08.2025, and therefore, the cause in the Civil Revision Petition does not survive. 3. Recording the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioners, the Civil Revision Petition is dismissed as infructuous. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, all pending applications shall stand closed. ____________________________________ JUSTICE MAHESWARA RAO KUNCHEAM Date: 11.03.2026 RMR 4 241 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE MAHESWARA RAO KUNCHEAM CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO: 4272 of 2018 11.03.2026 W RMR