D.Pavan v. Ch.Shiva Kumar
Court: High Court for State of Telangana
Bench: MOUSHUMI BHATTACHARYA,B.R.MADHUSUDHAN RAO
Judgment date:
Case summary
High Court for State of Telangana judgment dated 2025-06-12. D.Pavan v. Ch.Shiva Kumar. Read the judgment and case details on LawSphereX.
Judgment text
344s [ 1 IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD THURSDAY, THE TWELFTH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HON'BLE JUSTICE MOUSHUMI BHATTACHARYA AND THE HON'BLE JUSTICE B. R. MADHUSUDHAN RAO l. A. No. 2 ot 2O25 IN/AND M. A. C. M. A. No : 47 2 ot 2025 Appeal under Section 173 of Motor Vehicle Act, aggrieved by the order dated 19-01-2024 passed in Iv'1. V. O. P. No. 504 of 2017 on the file of the Court of the ll Additional Chief Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad. Between: '1. D. Pavan, S/o Late Ratnam, Aged 38 years, Occ. Business, 2 D. Sanjay, S/o Late Ratnam, Aged 34 year, Occ. Pvt. Employee, 3. D. Supriya, W/o Late Ratnam, Aged 59 years Occ. Housewife (The petitioner no. 2 and 3 are Rep. by peltioner No. 1 Through their Special Power of Attorney) All are R/o ,4606, Sri Sai Ram Gardens, Hafeezpet, Hyderabad. ... Appellants AND 1 Ch. Shiva Kumar, S/o Krishnaiah, Aged Major, Occ. owner of car R/o Lakshmipuram, Nellore, A.
P 2 Gaddam Shiva, S/o Nagaiah, Aged. Major, Occ. Driver R/o H-No. 1-76, Chegunta Village, Thimma. jipeta Mandal, Mahaboobnagar District - 509406 a United lndia lnsurance Co. Ltd. , Rep by its Divisional Manager, Presently at, lXth floor, Ull Building, Basheerbagh, Hyderabad ... Respondents lA NO: 2 OF 2025 Petition under Section 5 of Limitation Act praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to condone the delay of 253 days in filing the above appeal in the interest of justice. Counsel for the Appellants: Sri K. Hari Mohan Reddy Counsel forthe Respondents: None Appeared The Court made the following: ORDER wffi-z THE HON'BLE JUSTICE MOUSHUMI BHATTACHARYA AND THE HON'BLE JUSTICE B. R. MADHUSI'DHAN RAO I. A. NO. 2 0F 2025 IN AND M. A. C. M. A. NO. 472 0F 202s ORDER: (Per Hon'ble. tusticc Moushumi Bhatracharya) 1.
This is the second consecutive occasion when ica_rned counsel appearing for lhq appellanl is not repr. esent(. d. 2. I. A. No. 2 of 2025 and M. A. C M. A No. 472 of 2025. along rvith all connected applications, are accordingly dismissed for default. Interim orders, if arny, shall stand vacated. There shall be no order as to costs SD/. A. V. S. PRASAD DEPUTY REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// \\' SECTION OFFICER To, 1. The ll Additional Chief Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad 2 One CC to Sri K. Hari Mohan Reddy, Advocate [OPUC] 3 Two CD Copies Kam/gh Pla'r... HIGH COURT DATE D : 1 210612025 -a-a . a-' rl o (i)r () 2 I JUL 2025 ): ORDER . y l. A. No. 2 of 2025 { . ir IN/AND MACMA. N o. 472 ot 2025 l. A. No. 2 of 2025 AND MACMA No. 472 ot 2025 ARE DISMISSED PFrt o q4\44
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.