SEEMAKURTHY SATYANARAYANA MURTHY, W.G.DIST v. MAMILIPALLI SURYA CHITAMANI, W.G.DIST
CRP/5688/2016 · 2026-07-15
Purushottam Kumar Chintalapudi
body2026
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 6413 (AP) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 6413 (AP) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
APHC010104492016
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3606] THURSDAY, THE 16th DAY OF JULY 2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE PURUSHOTTAM KUMAR CHINTALAPUDI CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO: 5688/2016 Between:
1. SEEMAKURTHY SATYANARAYANA MURTHY, W.G.DIST, SON OF SESHAGIRI RAO, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, OCC: BUSINESS AND CULTIVATION, RESIDENT OF GAVARAVARAM VILLAGE, KOYYALAGUDEM MANDAL, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT
...PETITIONER AND
1. MAMILIPALLI SURYA CHITAMANI W G DIST, Son of late Sivarama Murthy, Aged about 65 years, Occ: Cultivation, Resident of Gavaravaram Village, Koyyalagudem Mandal, West Godavari District.
...RESPONDENT 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 toagainst the order dated 04.02.2014 passed in C.M.A.No.20 of 2014 on the file of the Court of IX Additional District Judge, West Godavari District, Kovvur, IA NO: 1 OF 2016(CRPMP 7369 OF 2016 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 suspend the order and decree dated 04.02.2016 passed in CMA No.20 of 2014 on the file of the Court of IX Additional District Judge, West Godavari District at Kovvur, pending disposal of the above CRP: and pass Counsel for the Petitioner:
1. V PADMANABHA RAO Counsel for the Respondent:
1. K JYOTHI PRASAD
2
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE PURUSHOTTAM KUMAR CHINTALAPUDI CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO: 5688/2016 ORDER:
There is no representation for the petitioner.
2. Sri K. Joythi Prasad, learned counsel appearing for the respondent submits that the present Civil Revision Petition has been challenging the order of the Trial Court, in C.M.A.No.20 of 2014, has been disposed of. Therefore, the cause does not survive for consideration in the present Civil Revision Petition.
2. Recording the said submission, the Civil Revision Petition is dismissed as infructuous. No order as to costs.
Interim order granted, if any, shall stand vacated.
Consequently, all pending Interlocutory Applications, if any, shall stand closed in terms of this order.
_____________________________________ PURUSHOTTAM KUMAR CHINTALAPUDI,J
Dated: 16.07.2026 BSM
3
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE PURUSHOTTAM KUMAR CHINTALAPUDI
CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO: 5688/2016
Dated: 16.07.2026 BSM