APHC010724272025 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: 176/2026 Between: 1. MANCHEM PAVANI, W/O MANCHEM MURALIDHAR, HINDU, AGED 31 YEARS, R/O FLAT NO. 3, SAVERA APARTMENT, OPP. 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 REGISTERED 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, ANDHRA PRADESH. 2. GANESULA LAKSHMAN RAO, S/O. MULAYYA, HINDU, AGED 58 YEARS, R/O. D.NO.3-59/2, RAJUPALEM VILLAGE, KIRLAMPUDI MANDAL, KAKINADA DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH. 3. THOTA CHANDRA SEKHAR, S/O. VEERA NARASIMHA RAO, HINDU, AGED 38 YEARS, R/O. D.NO.5-46, JAGGAMPETA VILLAGE AND MANDAL, KAKINADA 2 DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH 4. PAMU SRINIVAS, SIC. VEERARAGHAVULU, HINDU, AGED 41 YEARS, R/O. D.NO.6-120, GOLLAPROLU VILLAGE AND MANDAL, KAKINADA DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH. 5. VULISETTI NAGARAJU, S/O.CHINNA RAGAVULU, HINDU AGE 44 YEARS, RESIDENT OF D.NO.1-10-, VELDURTI, PITAPURAM MANDAL, KAKINADA DISTRICT. 6. SATYAMSETTI PADMANABHAM, S/O. BRAHMAJI, HINDU, AGED 55 YEARS, RIO. D.NO.68-10-1/11B, VIDYUTH NAGAR, NANCY STREET, NEAR IDEAL COLLEGE, KAKINADA, KAKINADA DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH. ...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.176 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 21.02.2025 passed in O.S.No.16 of 2025, whereby an ad-interim injunction was granted in I.A.No.206 of 2025 while issuing notice to the respondent. 2. I.A.No.2 of 2026 has been filed to condone the delay of 214 days. 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 214 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.206 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.176 of 2026 30.03.2026 Pab