Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Andhra Pradesh · body

2026 DAILYLAW 26995 (AP)

Allu Latchamma v. Pillamudi Chinna

CRP/3720/2025 · 2026-02-09

Tarlada Rajasekhar Rao

Public Interest Litigationbody2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

APHC010669002025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3330] TUESDAY,THE TENTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO: 3720/2025 Between: 1. ALLU LATCHAMMA, (DIED) W/O LATE THAVITAYYA, 2. ALLU APPARAO, (DIED) S/O LATE THAVITAYYA, 3. ALLU RAMARAO @ RAMAYYA, S/O LATE THAVITAYYA, AGED 29 YEARS, OCC R/O GOLLA STREET, SALUR, VIZIANAGARAM DISTRICT. 4. ALLU RAMANAMMA, (DIED) D/O LATE THAVITAYYA, 5. ALLU ESWARAMMA, D/O LATE THAVITAYYA, AGED 29 YEARS, OCC R/O GOLLA STREET, SALUR, VIZIANAGARAM DISTRICT. 6. ALLU LAKSHMI, D/O LATE THAVITAYYA, AGED 31 YEARS, OCC R/O GOLIA STREET, SALUR, VIZIANAGARAM DISTRICT. 7. ALLU PARVATHI, (DIED) D/O LATE THAVITAYYA, 8. KORIPILLI GANGAMMA, (DIED) W/O KORIPALLI KRISHNA (LATE) PER L.RS.10 TO 16 9. KORIPALLI KRISHNA, (DIED) S/O KORIPILLI SOMANNA (LATE) 10. KORIPILLI GOWRI SHANKAR, S/O LATE KRISHNA, 52 YEARS, OCC R/O GOLLA VEEDHI, SALUR TOWN. 11. KORIVPILLI SRINU,, 45 YEARS, REST-DO. AGED ABOUT YEARS, OCC R/O GOLLA VEEDHI, SALUR TOWN. 2 12. JAMMU SYAMALA,, W/O GOWRIRAJU, AGED 37 YEARS, OCC PACHIPENTA VILLAGE 13. KODIBHONU SANTHOSH,, S/O LATE SANKAR RAO, AGED 27 YEARS,OCC R/O GOLLA VEEDHI, SALUR TOWN. 14. VASAMSETTY JAYALAKSHMI,, W/O KOTI, AGED 36 YEARS, OCC R/O GOLLA VEEDHI, SALUR TOWN. 15. KORIPILLI IHEMANTHA KUMAR,, S/O LATE PRASAD, AGED 22 YEARS, OCC R/O GOLLA VEEDHI, SALUR TOWN. 16. BODDU SWARNALATHA,, D/0 PRASAD, W/O BHARAT, AGED 24 YEARS, OCC R/O PENDURTHI, SUJATHA NAGAR, VISAKHAPATNAM. ...PETITIONER(S) AND 1. PILLAMUDI CHINNA, W/O LATE SEETHAYYA, AGED 71 YEARS, R/O GOLLA STREET, SALUR, VIZIANAGARAM DISTRICT 2. ALLU RAMANAMMA, W/O BOTTI PYDIRAJU, AGED 65 YEARS, R/O GOLLA STREET, SALUR, VIZIANAGARAM DISTRICT. ...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 tomay be pleased to set aside the order dated 01-12-2025 passed in E.A.No.24 of 2018 in E.P.No.l of 2018 in O.S.NO.103 of 1978 on the file of Civil Judge (Junior Division) Salur and allow the Review Petition and pass such IA NO: 1 OF 2025 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 may be please to condone the delay of 1522 days in filing the LR.Petition in the above A.S.No.15 of 1990 and pass such IA NO: 2 OF 2025 3 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 may be please to set aside the abetment in respect of Appellant No.8 in A.S.No. 15 of 1990 and to pass such IA NO: 3 OF 2025 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 may be pleased to permit the petitioner to bring on record the respondents 10 to 16 as Legal Representatives of deceased 8th respondent to the main CRP and pass such IA NO: 4 OF 2025 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 may be pleased to suspend the order dated 01-12-2025 passed in E.A.No.24 of 2018 in E.P.No.l of 2018 in O.S.NO.103 of 1978 on the file of Civil Judge (Junior Division) Salur, pending disposal of the Revision petition in the interest of justice and be pleased to pass such Counsel for the Petitioner(S): 1. SRAVAN KUMAR NAIDANA Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. G RAMA GOPAL The Court made the following: 4 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.3720 OF 2025 ORDER: Smt B.Sukanya, learned counsel representing learned counsel for the petitioners, sought permission of this Court to withdraw the civil revision petition. Learned counsel endorsed the same on the bundle. Permission is accorded. Accordingly, the Civil Revision Petition is dismissed as withdrawn. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. __________________________________ JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO Date: 10.02.2026 KBN 5 45 THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.3720 of 2025 Date: 10.02.2026 KBN