APHC010724382025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3572] MONDAY,THE THIRTIETH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI NATH TILHARI THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE BALAJI MEDAMALLI CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL NO: 177/2026 Between: 1. MANCHEM PAVANI, W/O MANCHEM MURALIDHAR, HINDU, AGED 31 YEARS, R/O FLAT NO. 3, SAVERA APARTMENT, 0PP. PRAGATHI HOSPITAL, ROUND PARK, PRAKASH NAGAR, RAJAHMUNDRY, EAST GODAVARI DISTRICT (AND ALSO R/O D.NO. 3-112, GOKAVARAM VILLAGE AND MANDAL, EAST GODAVARI DISTRICT) ...APPELLANT AND 1. SRI MURALI KRISHNA CONSTRUCTIONS, A PARTNERSHIP FIRM, REP. BY ITS MANAGING PARTNER GANESULA RAMBABU, S/O. MULAYYA, HINDU, AGED 58 YEARS, R/O D.NO. 3-59/1, RAJUPALEM VILLAGE, KIRLAMPUDI MANDAL, KAKINADA DISTRICT. 2. THOTA VEERA NARASIMHA RAO, S/O. CHINNARAO, HINDU, AGED 66 YEARS, R/O D.NO. 5-46, JAGGAMPETA, JAGGAMPETA MANDAL, KAKINADA DISTRICT. 3. VULISETTI NAGARAJU, S/O. CHINA RAGHAVULU, HINDU, AGED 44 YEARS, R/O D.NO. 1-116, VELDURTHI, PITAPURAM MANDAL, KAKINADA DISTRICT. 4. PENTA GOVINDA RAJU, S/O. VIJAY KUMAR, HINDU, AGED 35 YEARS, R/O D.NO. 3-33, KATTAMURU, PEDDAPURAM 2 MANDAL, KAKINADA DISTRICT ...RESPONDENT(S): Counsel for the Appellant: 1. KARTHIKSIDDARTHA SALADI Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. The Court made the following: 3 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI NATH TILHARI THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE BALAJI MEDAMALLI I.A.No.2 of 2026 IN/AND CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL No.177 of 2026 JUDGMENT: (per Hon’ble Sri Justice Ravi Nath Tilhari) The C.M.A has been filed under Order 43 Rule 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, by the defendant in the suit, challenging the order dated 13.03.2025 passed in O.S.No.24 of 2025, whereby an ad-interim injunction was granted in I.A.No.323 of 2025 while issuing notice to the respondents. 2. I.A.No.2 of 2026 has been filed to condone the delay of 193 days in filing the appeal. 3. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the appellant/defendant has already filed objections before the learned Trial Court, which are pending for consideration. 4. The reasons shown in the affidavit in support of I.A.No.2 of 2026 for an inordinate delay of 193 days in challenging the said order, are not sufficient. 4 5. Further, since the objections have already been filed, which are said to be pending for consideration before the learned Trial Court, we are not inclined to entertain the present C.M.A. 6. If I.A.No.323 of 2025 is still pending for consideration before the learned Trial Court, to which the objections have been filed as stated, the same shall be expedited by the learned Trial Court. 7. The application, I.A.No.2 of 2026 is rejected. 8. Consequently, the C.M.A. is also rejected with the aforesaid observations. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, interlocutory applications pending if any, shall stand closed. _____________________ RAVI NATH TILHARI, J _____________________ BALAJI MEDAMALLI, J Date: 30.03.2026. Pab 5 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI NATH TILHARI THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE BALAJI MEDAMALLI I.A.No.2 of 2026 IN/AND CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL No.177 of 2026 30.03.2026 Pab