Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Andhra Pradesh · body

2026 DAILYLAW 24841 (AP)

Moyya Daniel Pratap v. Ravada Victor Lauranson (Died)

CRP/2662/2025 · 2026-01-30

Ravi Nath Tilhari

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

APHC010522492025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3299] SATURDAY, THE THIRTY FIRST DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI NATH TILHARI CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO: 2662/2025 Between: Moyya Daniel Pratap, ...PETITIONER AND Ravada Victor Lauranson Died and Others ...RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner: 1.ARRABOLU SAI NAVEEN Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1.S RAJAN 2. The Court made the following: RNT, J CRP No.224 of 2026 2 THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI NATH TILHARI CIVIL REVISION PETITION No. 2662 of 2025 JUDGMENT: On 30.01.2026 the following order was passed. “Request for adjournment has been made by the learned counsel for the petitioner/judgment debtor. 2. The same is opposed by the learned counsel appearing for the respondents 1 to 3/decree holders. He submits that the E.P is pending since 2013. However, he submits that the matter may be taken up tomorrow i.e. on 31.01.2026. 3. List on 31.01.2026.” 2. Today, the matter is listed. Sri A. Sai Naveen, learned counsel for the petitioner, submits that he has filed a memo on behalf of the petitioner to withdraw the civil revision petition. The said memo reads as under: “May it please your Lordships, I may be permitted to withdraw the above civil revision petition with the liberty to challenge the main execution proceedings at the appropriate time. Hence the Memo.” 3. The liberty as prayed is to challenge the main execution proceedings at the appropriate time. Execution Petition is pending. The challenge is to the rejection of the E.A., i.e., objection filed under Section 47 CPC. The execution petition is not the subject matter of this revision petition. 4. At this stage, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is not pressing the civil revision petition, and the same may be dismissed as ‘not pressed’. He submits that he is not seeking that liberty. RNT, J CRP No.224 of 2026 3 5. Accordingly, the civil revision petition is dismissed as ‘not pressed’. No order as to costs. Pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed in consequence. _______________________ RAVI NATH TILHARI, J Date: 31.01.2026 Dsr