The High Court · 2025

...Appellants/Respondent Nos.1 & 3/Defendants Nos.1 & 3 AND 1 2 Arush Reddy Bommi, S/o B. N. Sankeerth Reddy, aged about .l .l years Amaira Reddy Bommi, D/o B. N. Sankeerth Reddy, aged about g years Both rep. by their mother and natural Guardian Neelima Vanguru Wo B. N. Sankeerth Reddy, aged 39 years Occ: Pvt. Service, Alo' fAt B- 1004, 1Oth ft9o1 [ Block, Trendset Jayabheri Elevate Kothaguda, Kondapur, l/ladhapur Hyderabad- 500084. J B. N. Sankeerth Reddy, S/o Late. Ramana Reddy, aged 42 years Occ pvt. service r/o 41'vrlavarasha.Ltllil"t;il1yil;""J"TJfl-,un?::rlSerenaantNo.z ...Respondents/Petitioners/Plaintiffs

4. Bank of Baroda, Rep. by its Manager T. Nagar Br. , Chennai- 600017. ...RespondenURespondent No.4/Defendant No.4 CIVIL MISCE LLANEOUS APPEAL NO: 346 oF 2024 Appeal Under Order 43 Rule -'1 (0 of CPC against the Order dated 14.1o.2o2oinlA'No'BllOof2O2OinoS.No.6lof2020onthefileoftheCourtof tner XV Additional District and Sessions Judge-cum- XV Additional Metropolitan i."sion. Judge _ cum_ Il Additional Family Judge, R. R. District, Kukaipally. Between:

1. B.Karuna Reddy, w/o LateB.Ramana-Rgddy' qg ff ori"*it", rto a" ,Vrjayaraghava Road T Nagar, Ch 2 B.Vishruth Reddy, S/o Late.B.Ramana-Reddy,. aged about 37 years' occ.: Fii"i'i" l"r" t!, - iio ll. VijJyiraghava Roao-i t'tagar, chennai- rep bv GPA UofOdi A.Krtrn', ReoOy w/ir LateIB.Ramana Reddy, aged aboul 65 years occ: riolE*it" ito +l ,vtl riar^ghava Road T.Nagar, Chennai ed about 65 years, occ ...Appellants/Respondent Nos'1 & 3/Defendants Nos'l & 3 f,:' rt AND 1 2 J 4 Arush Reddy Bornmi, S/o B.N.Sankeerth Reddy, aged about 11 years Amaira Reddv Brlmmi, D/o B.N.Sankeerth Reddy, aged about B years Both r."olw tf,"ii"iother and natural Guardian Neelima Vanguru w/o 'aIN-.dr';L;rtti qeodv ageO 39 years occ Pvt.service r/o Flat B-1004' Iotiifl o.i, +atoci, iieno"set Jay'abheri Elevate Kothag uda Kon'lapur' Madhapur HYderabad-500084 ... Respondents/Petitioners/Plaintiffs B.N.Sankeerth Reddy, s/o Late.RamanaR-eddy, aged 42 years^occ Fut. S"*i""'lo 4 1, Yiiay araghava Road T. Nagar, Chennai-6000 1 7' Bank of Baroda, rep.by its Manager T.Nagar Br., Chennai-600017' .'.Respondent /Respondent No'2/DefendantNo'2 ..RespondenURespondent No.4/Defendant No.4 CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL NO: 348 OF 2024 Appeal Under Order 43 Rule -1 (r) of CPC against the Order dated i4.10.2$O in tA. No.819 oI 2O2O in OS.No.61 of 2020 on the file of the Court of the XV Additional District and Sessions Judge-cum- XV Additional Metropolitan SessionsJudge-cunr-llAdditionalFamilyJudge,R.R.District,Kuk.atpally- Between:

1. B.Karuna Reddy, w/o Late.B.Ramana Reddy, aged about 55 years occ' Housewife rlo 41, Ytiayaraghava Road T.Nagar, Chennai.

2. B.Vishruth Reddy, s/o Late.B.Ramana Reddy aged about 37 years occ: Private service, rlo 41, Vijayaraghava Road T.Nagar, Chennai rep.by GPA Holder B.Karuna Reddy w/o Late.B.Ramana Reddy, aged about 65 years occ Housewife rlo a' ,Vijayaraghava Road T.Nagar, Chennat. ...Appellants/Respondent Nos.1 & 3/Defendants Nos'1 & 3 ... AND

1. Arush Reddy Bommi, Sio B.N.Sankeerth Reddy, aged about 11 years 2. Amaira,,Reddy Bommi,.D/o B N Sankeerth Reddy, aged about g years Both lep;bJ their mother and natural Guardian Neelim-a Vbnguru w/o ' p.fl,panke^e(fi Reddy, aged 39 years occ: pvt.Service"r/o Flat B_1004, -lOthtloor, B-Block, Trendset Jayabheri Elevate Kothaguda, Kondapur, ' Madhapur Hyderabad-500084. - ...Respondents/petitioners/plaintiffs 3 B-N.Sankeerlh Pvt.Servace rlo 41 , Ytjayaraghava Road T.Nagar, Chennai-600017. BfQ9y, s/o Late.Ramana Reddy, aged 42 years occ.

4. Bank of Baroda, rep.by its Manager T.Nagar Br., Chennai-600017. ...Respondent /Respondent No.2/Defendant No.2 ...RespondenURespondent No.4/Defendant No.4 *1}- rt Counsel for the Appellants in all CMAs : Sri J prabhakar representing Ms. Kanumuri Kalyani Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1 & 2 in all CMAs : Sri C Subha Rao representing Sri Rajesh Maddy Counsel for the Respondent No.3 in all CMAs: Sri Kavali Srinivas The Court delivered the following: COMMON JUDGMENT I : 4.. (1 { l I I ,t I I THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE T. VTNOD KUMAR AND THE HON,BLE ST1TJUSTICE P.SREE SUDHA ,A.N .345 6 nd3 20 co MON ] UDG MENT'. (per Honble Srilustice T.Vinod Kumar) ' These Clvil Mlscellaneous Appeals are flled against the common order dt.14.10.2020 passed in I.A.Nos.821 of 2020,820 of 2020 & 348 of 2020 in O.S.No.61 of 2O2O

2. Heard Sri l.Prabhakar, learned Senior Counsel, appearing on behalf of Ms;.Kanumuri Kalyani, Iearned counsel for the petitioners/appella nts, Sri C.Subba Rao, learned counsel representing Sri Maddy Rajesh, Iearned counsel appearing for respondent Nos l and 2 and Sri Kavali Srinivas, learned counsel appearing for respondent N() 3 and perused the reco'd.

3. The relevant portion of the common order dt 14'10'2020 of the Coutt below reads as under: "The status quo orders referred to above shall be in force pending final disposal of the suit. The suit shall be disposed of as agreed upon between borh the parties within a period of one year from the date of this uncerstating order. It is made clear that the above order is made without prejudice to the rights and contents of both the parties " I I

4. Though it is contended by the learned Senior Counsel appoaring on behalf of the apo3llants that more than one year has passed by no progress is made in the suit, as many pafties are impleaded as defendants irl the suit subsequently ard as such, the aforesaid suit filed by the i I \ .: ,! 2 respondents/plaintiffs is not likely to be disposed of in the near Future, much less within a year, as noted in the order dt.14.10.2020, which has long passed by and thereby, the status quo order coming in the way of the appellants herein, and having regard to the relationship between the parties to the original proceedings, this court is of the view that instated of this Couft deaiing with the matter on merits, and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the matter, the appellants herein are to be directed to approach the Couft below seeking modification of the order dt.14.10.2020.

5. It is made clear that in the event of the appellants herein approaching the Court below and filing any application seeking modification of the aforesaid order dt.14.10.2020, the Court below shall consider the same in an expeditious manner. 6 Subject to the above observation, the Civil Miscellaneous appeals are disposed of. No order as to costs 7 Pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed in the light of this final order. //TRUE GOPY// Sd/- M. MANJULA PUTY REGISTRAR ECTION OFFICER P, i I l I i i I I \ To,

1. The XV Additional District and Sessions Judge-cum- XV Additional Metropolitan Sessions Judge - cum- ll Additional Family Judge, R. R District, Kukatpally

2. One CC to Ms. Kanumuri Kalyani, Advocate [OPUC] 3. One CC to Sri Rajesh Maddy, Advocate [OPUC] 4. One CC to Sri Kavali Srinivas, Advocate [OPUC] 5. Two CD Copies ADI(gh i w / HIGH COURT DATED:3010112025 / , -,{ \rrr- -' .-- :) o 2 7 lrAn 2025 t 'oFsi y ? C * COMMON JUDGMENT CMA.No.345,346 AND 348 ot 2024 r.. * DISPOSING OF THE CMAs WITHOUT COSTS (- d