Pathakoti Gopaiah (Died) v. Vanka Venugopal Reddy
Court: High Court for State of Telangana
Bench: T.MADHAVI DEVI
Judgment date:
Case summary
High Court for State of Telangana judgment dated 2026-04-17. Pathakoti Gopaiah (Died) v. Vanka Venugopal Reddy. Read the judgment and case details on...
Judgment text
321s ] [ IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD FRIDAY, THE SEVENTEENTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE T. MADHAVI DEVI CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO: 1077 OF 2026 '1 Petition under section 15 of C. P. C. aggrieved by the order dated 05-12-2O25 of the passed in l. A. No 1 ot 2023 in o. s. No. 141 of 2018 on the file of the court Principal Junior Civil Judge, at Khammam. Between: '1 . Pathakoti GoPaiah (Died) 2. Pathakoti Puilaiah, S/o. Late Gopaiah, Age: 63 years, Occ: Agriculture, R/o' H. No. 4-2811, Kamalapuram Village' Mudrgonda Mandal, Khammam District' 3. Pathakoti Narayana, S/o. Late Gopaiah, Age: 58 years, Occ: Agriculture' R/o. H. No. 4-2811, Kamalapuram Village, Mudigonda Mandal, Khammam District. Nos. 2 & 3 ... Petitioners/Petitioners/Proposed Plaintiff AND Vanka Venugopal Reddy, S/o Late Anantha Ramaiah, Age: 48 years, Occ: Agriculture Jnd Business, R/o. Kamalapuram Village, Mudigonda Mandal' Khammam District. ...
RespondenURespondenUDefendant Counsel for the Petitioners: M/s. Mummaneni Srinivasa Rao Counsel for the Respondent: None Appeared The Court made the following: ORDER IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF IELANGANA AT HYDERABAD THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE T. MADH/I i/I DEVI CwIL REVISION PETITION No. 1O77 ot 2o26 DATE: L7. O4. 2O26 Between: Pathakoti Gopaialr (Died) and 2 others I . .. Petitioners I AND Vanka Venugopal Reddy ... Respondent ORDER This CRP is filed against the order dated Oli 12. 2025 passed in I. A. No. 1 of 2023 in O. S. No. 141 of 2018, on th: file of Principal Junior Civil Judge at Khammam dismissing the rpplication filed under Section 5 ol the Limitation Act to condonc he clelay of 422 days in filing the set aside abatement petition. 2. Learned counsel appearing for the petitior-rer fairl1, 66n666. 6 that this CRP is not marntainable and the petiti< r er has to file a CRP against the order of abatement and not agai rst the order of rejection to condone the delay. 3.
In vier,r' thereof, this CRP is closed with liberty to the petitioner to file a fresh CRP against the order of abatement. No costs Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this Petition, shall stand closed. SD/. P. C. SULEKHA DEVI ASSISTANT REGISTRAR /: (9- //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER To, 1 . The Principal Junior Civil Judge, at Khammam. 2. One CC to M/s. Mummaneni Sdnivasa Rao, Advocate [OPUC] 3. Two CD Copies KAt\illKA r' HIGH COURT DATED: 1710412026 i HES ({ ORDER T. :' o ' ; rpn )fi). ti i '-J c) i CRP. No. 1077 oI2026 \\$ :. {. ; \1;. -. 5 t. ':')';' CLOSING THE CRP o {"t"t ,''
Source: High Court for State of Telangana. Dataset: Dattam Labs. CC BY 4.0. Text extracted automatically; compare with the source PDF for layout and accuracy.