The High Court · 2025

Counsel for the Appellants : GP for Appeals Counsel for the Respondent Nos. 2 to 4 : None appeared Counsel for the Respondent No. 5 : Sri R S Murthy Counsel for the Respondent No. 7 : Sri A Sudershan Reddy The Court delivered the following: !:- THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE ABHINAND KUMAR SHAVILI AND THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE TIRUMALA DEVI EADA A.S.No.29O1 oF 2OO4 JUDGMENTi per rhe I tott ble Sn Justice Abhrrrand Kunror Sttauitif When the matter is taken up for hearing, learned counsel appearing for the appellant has informed the Court that identical cases u/ere dismissed by this Court in A.S.Nos.3717 of 2OO4 and 2657 of 2OO3 vide judgment, dated 1 3. 02 .2O25. By following the aforesaicl order, the present Appeal is also liable to be dismissed.

2. In view of the said submissions, this Court is of the considered vieu, that the present Appeal also deserves to be dismissed following the a,foresaid judgment, dated

13.O2.2O25, passed b,y this Court in A.S.Nos.37I7 of 2OO4 and2657 of2003.

3. Accordingly, the Appeal is dismissed following the aloresaid judgment, dated 13.02.2025, passed by this Court r,ffi in A.S.Nos.il717 of 2004 and 2657 of 2OO3 There shal1 be no order as to costs Miscellaneous Petitions, if any, pending i n this Appeal shall stand closed. t I ,,:85*h:3't+RiR / /ITRUE COPY'/ c ION OFFICER To, luitJ :?"-,"J[: Jl i l]]'r," c o u rt B u i rd i nss I 2 rh e se nio. c ivil J udse,Pe:::j,:l: Two CCs to the Pubhc Pror il['33i: ui'i[*:l,lg:ffi ,il,Xi},e one CC to Sri A Sudersn 4 5 Two CD CoPies a ro F,,, c, DUPSL W - =::--::!-.. iltr- i;r,[i5 '.,,.. , \ ., .\\ l\./ -.. a \', .P \\ 'Bl't 2tr6 iili ,a ' .',/ n,,, ,'-/ f ' i I I i I I I I I i I HIGH COURT DATED:1910212O25 JUDGMENT AS.No.2901 ol 2004 a- c DISMISSING THE APPEAL \0 [ 34451 IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD WEDNESDAY, THE NINETEENTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE ABHINAND KUMAR SHAVILI AND THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE TIRUMALA DEVI EADA APPEAL SUIT NO: 2901 OF 2004 Between:

1. The Special Dy. Collector, LA Unit, South Central Railway (New Eroad Gauge Line), Karimnagar.

2. The General Manager, South Central Railway, Secunderabad. (Appellant No. 2 is brought on record is impleaded as per Cou( Order dated 10-4-2008 in LAASMP No. 2596 of 2005) ...APPELLANT/RESPONDENT AND

1. P. Mallaiah (die) per L.Rs RR 7, 2. Poodari Narsamma, Wo Odelu, Occ: Household R/o Rangampalli (V), Peddapalli (M)

3. Kondi Komuraiah, S/o Ganesh, Occ: Employee in SCC Ltd., Godavarikhani R"/o Rangampalli (V), Peddapalli (M)

4. Poodari Rajesham, S/o Odelu, Occ: Employee in SCC Ltd., Godavarikhani R/o Rangampalli (V), Peddapalli (M)

5. Poodari Komuraiah, S/o Odelu, Occ: Employee in SCC Ltd., Godavarikhani R/o Rangampalli (V), Peddapalli (M) 6 Baltha Lingaiah, Sio Rajaiah, Occ: Agril. R/o Near Kaman, Peddapalli (V) and (M)

7. P. Komuraiah, Sio. P. Mallaiah, Occ: Agril. R/o Near Kaman, Peddapalli (V) and (M) (Resp No. 7 is brought on record as L.Rs ofdeceased respondent No. 1 vide Court order dated 21 .12.04 in ASMP No. 1540'1 of 2004 ...RESPONDENTS i' ::1 .ri8f'* ,!: Senior Civil Judge, peddapaili. Appeat under section 54 of L.A. Act of 1gg4 agairst the Judgment and Decree Dated 2g-12-2003 made in o.p.No.gg of 1g7 0nthe frre of the court of the This appeal coming on for hearing and upon peru:;ing the grounds of appear' the Judgment and Decree of the court and the rrateriar papers in the case and upon hearing the arguments of Gp for Appears for the apperant and sri R S Murthy, Advocate for the Respondent No. 5, and t\,lone appeared for Respondent Nos. 2 to 4. This Court doth Order and Decree as follows:

1. That the Appeal Suit be and hereby is dismissed; and 2. That there shall be no order as to costs in this appeal. SD/. A.V.S.PRASAD DI:I)UTY REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// Sr=-CTION OFFTCER To, ] Jhu Senior Civit Judge, peddapaili 2. Two CD Cooies DL/PSL M HIGH COURT DAf ED:1910212025 DECREE AS.No.2901 of 2004 DISMISSING THE APPEAL I \10