BETHIREDDY SATYANARAYANA REDDY v. BETHIREDDY VENKATA REDDY
Case at a glance
Outcome
Dismissed
In view of the same, the Civil Revision Petition is dismissed as
Provisions considered
- Constitution of India art. 227
- Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 s. 151
Key paragraphs
- Para 44. In view of the same, the Civil Revision Petition is dismissed as infructuous. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, miscellaneous applications, pending if any, shall stand closed. Date: 09th February, 2026 JLV _____________________________ JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI 5 471 THE…
Judgment
Cause title
SRINIVASA BETHIREDDY SATYANARAYANA REDDY, AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS, R/O. D. NO.1- WEST 18, AINAPARRU VILLAGE, GODAVARI, ANDHRA PRADESH. IRAGAVARAM MANDAL, REDDY,, S/O. ...PETITIONER(S)
AND
1. BETHIREDDY VENKATA REDDY, S/O. LATE BETHIREDDY RAMI REDDY, AGED ABOUT 78 YEARS, R/O. AINAPARRU VILLAGE, IRAGAVARAM MANDAL, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH.
2. BETHIREDDYSRINIVASA REDDY, S/O. LATE BETHIREDDY RAMI REDDY, AGED ABOUT 76 YEARS, R/O. D. NO.10-327, OPPOSITE TO RTC BUS COMPLEX, JANGAREDDIGUDEM, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH.
3. BETHIREDDYCHANDRAVATHI, W/O. SRI BETHIREDDY SRINIVASA REDDY, AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS, R/O. D. NO.10-327, OPPOSITE TO RTC BUS COMPLEX, JANGAREDDIGUDEM, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH. 2
4. BETHIREDDY SRIRAMA REDDY, S/O. BETHIREDDY SRINIVASA REDDY, AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS, R/O. D. NO.10-327, OPPOSITE TO RTC BUS COMPLEX, JANGAREDDIGUDEM, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH.
5. BETHIREDDY CHELLAYAMMA, LATE BETHIREDDYBHEEMIREDDY, AGED 74 YEARS, R/O. PLOT NO.93, PRASHANT NAGAR COLONY, NEAR SRIPURAM COLONY, DILSHUKNAGAR, HYDERABAD - 500 060. W/O.
6. BETHIREDDY LAKSHMIPATHI LATE BETHIREDDYBHEEMIREDDY, AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS, R/O. PLOT NO.93, PRASHANT NAGAR COLONY, NEAR SRIPURAM COLONY, DILSHUKNAGAR, HYDERABAD - 500 060. REDDY, S/O.
7. ANNAMREDDY VANI, W/O. ANNAMREDDYVISWANATHA REDDY, R/O. AINAPARRU VILLAGE, AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS, IRAGAVARAM MANDAL, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH.
8. BETHIREDDY NAGESWARA REDDY, S/O. LATE SRINIVASA REDDY, AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS, R/O. D. NO.10-327, OPPOSITE TO RTC BUS COMPLEX, JANGAREDDIGUDEM.
9. CHINTA SATYAVANI, W/O. SATYANARAYANA REDDY, AGED 52 YEARS, R/O. D. NO.10-327, OPPOSITE TO RTC BUS COMPLEX, JANGAREDDIGUDEM.
10. BETHIREDDYMANIKANTAREDDY, S/O. BETHIREDDY SRIRAM REDDY, AGED 38 YEARS, R/O. D. NO.10-327, OPPOSITE TO RTC BUS COMPLEX, JANGAREDDIGUDEM.
11. BETHIREDDYMANIKANTA REDDY, S/O. BETHIREDDY SRIRAM REDDY, AGED 25 YEARS, R/O. D. NO.10-327, OPPOSITE TO RTC BUS COMPLEX, JANGAREDDIGUDEM.
12. BETHIREDDY SRINIVASA REDDY, S/O. BETHIREDDY SRIRAM REDDY, AGED 6 YEARS, R/O. D. NO.10-327, OPPOSITE TO RTC BUS COMPLEX, JANGAREDDIGUDEM. ...RESPONDENT(S)
: 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 3 pleased tobeg to present this Memorandum of Civil Revision filed under Article 227 of Constitution of India, being aggrieved by the Order, dated 18- 06-2024, passed by the Court of the Principal Civil Judge (Senior Division), Kovvur, in I.A.No.175 of 2019 in O.S.No.286 of 2011,for the following among the other grounds IA NO: 1 OF 2024 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 pleased to stay the Order, dated 18-06-2024, passed by the Court of the Principal Civil Judge(Senior Division), Kovvur, in I.A.No.175 of 2019 in O.S.No.286 of 2011,and pass Counsel for the Petitioner(S):
1. PARIMI RAMA RAYUDU Counsel for the Respondent(S):
1. K JYOTHI PRASAD The Court made the following: 4
ORDER:
The present civil revision petition has been filed by the petitioners aggrieved by the order passed in I.A.No.175 of 2019 in O.S.No.286 of 2011 by the learned Principal Civil Judge (Senior Division), Kovvur.
Sri Yadavalli Ramesh, learned counsel representing Sri Parimi Rama Rayudu, learned counsel for the petitioners and Ms.V.Sowmya, learned counsel representing Sri K.Jyothi Prasad, learned counsel the respondents, collectively reported that the suit itself has been disposed of, as the matter was settled before the Lok Adalat, and that the present civil revision petition has become infructuous.
Registry has also placed on record the case information status, which indicates that on 13.12.2025, the suit was disposed of.
Operative part
In view of the same, the Civil Revision Petition is dismissed as infructuous. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, miscellaneous applications, pending if any, shall stand closed. Date: 09th February, 2026 JLV _____________________________ JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI 5 471 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO: 1971/2024 Date: 09th February, 2026 JLV
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: In view of the same, the Civil Revision Petition is dismissed as
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Constitution of India — art. 227; Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 — s. 151.
Which court decided this case, and when?
Andhra Pradesh High Court, on 09 Feb 2026. The bench was RAVI CHEEMALAPATI.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.