✦ Court unavailable

Margadarsi Chit Fund Private Limited, (Formerly known as tvlargadarsi Chit Funds v. V.Vijay Kumar

N BALAYOGI3 min read

Case at a glance

Provisions considered

Judgment

Cause title

:PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N. BALAYOGI

CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO: 1961 OF 2012 Between: Margadarsi Chit Fund Private Limited, (Formerly known as tvlargadarsi Chit Funds Limiied) Having its registered and Corporate Office at 5-10-1 95, Fatehmaidan Road, opp. P6lice Control Room, Hyderabad Having among other branches, a Branch at Vanasthalipuram, Situated at L.B.Nagar Ring Road, R.R.District, represented by its Principal Officer and General Manager, Recoveries Department, Sri A.Suryanarayana Raju' s/o A Bangar Raju petitioner/praintiff AND

1. V.Vijay Kumar, S/o. V. Satyanarayana, Occ: Proprietor, M/s. Renuka Tent House (Suppiy of Tent l\4aterials) D.No. 2-2-1090/4/A, lndira Nagar, Golnaka, Amberpet, Hyd-1 3, R/o. H.No. 2-2-1093/82122, Vinayak Nagar, Golnaka, Amberpet, Hyderabad - 13. 2. G. Sukhdev Gupta,, S/o. Gaziram, Occ: Points Man "A", South Central Railway, Kachiguda, Hyderabad - 27 , No. #9-3-421, Near Pochamma Temple, Rezimental Bazar, Secunderabad

3. G. Rajesh,, S/o. G. Laxmi Narsaiah, Occ: Proprietor, tvl/s. Aditya CD World & Wood Works, 2-2-10901N9, New lndira Nagar, Golnaka, Hyderabad -'13, R/o. H.No. 2-2-'1090iN42, Golnaka, Amberpet, Hyderabad - 1 3. 4. A. Jampaiah,, S/o. A. Yellaiah, Occ: Shunting Master, SC Railway, Kachiguda Hyderabad- 27, R/o. H.No. 20-94112, Chilaka Nagar, Uppal (N/), Ranga Reddy District - 39 Respondents/Respondents/Defendants Whereas the Petitioner above named through its Advocate Sri P.Durga Prasad, presented this Civil Revision Petition to the Hlgh Court under Article 227 of the Constitution of lndia to revise the order dt. 26-11-2011 on the file of the Court of the Junior Civil Judge-cum-Vll M.M, Cyberabad, R.R.District at Hayathnagar made in OS.SR.No. 146412011. And whereas the High Court, upon perusing the petition and the memo of grounds filed herein and upon hearing the arguments of

Sri P.Durga prasad, Advocate for the Petitioner, directed issue of fresh notlce to the Respondents 2 & 3 herein returnable in two weeks to show cause why this petition should not be admitted. You viz:

9. Sukhdev Gupta,, S/o. G_azjram, Occ: Points Man "A", South Central Railway, Kachiguda, llyderabad - 27, FJo. #9-3-421, Near Pochamma Temple, Rezimental Bazar, Secunderabad G. Raje-sh,, S/o. G. Laxmi Narsaiah, Occ: Proprietor, M/s. Aditya CD World & W99d W9rk9, 2-2-10901N9, New tndira Nagai, Gotnaka, Hyderabad -13, Rl/o. H.No. 2-2-1090/AJ42, Golnaka, Amberpet, Hyderabad - 13. 2 are directed to show cause as to why in the circumstances set out in this petition and the memo of grounds filed therewith (copy enclosed) this civil Revision petition should not be admitted. The Cou( made the following

ORDER:

" lssue fresh notice to the respondent No.2 ahd 3, to the correct address, returnable in two weeks.

2. Counsel for the petitioner is permitted to take out personal notice on the said respondents by RPAD and file proof of service in the Registry.

3. Post after two weeks 2 ASSISTANT R Sd/- K.AIVMAJI ISTRAR // TRUE COPY // for ASSISTANT REGISTRAR To

1.

G. Sukhdev Gupta,, S/o. Gaziram, Occ: Points Man "A", South Central Railway, Kachiguda, Hyderabad - 27, RJo. #9-3-421, Near Pochamma Temple, Rezimental Bazar, Secunderabad

2.

G. Rajesh,, S/o. G. Laxmi Narsaiah, Occ: Proprietor, tM/s, Aditya CD World & Wood Works, 2-2-10901N9, New lndira Nagar, Golnaka, Hyderabad -13, Fyo. H.No. 2-2-1090/tu42, Golnaka, Amberpet, Hyderabad - 13. (1 & 2 by RPAD along with a copy of Petitron and Memo of Grounds) 3 One CC to Sri P.Durga Prasad, Advocate(OPUC) 4 One spare copy. HIGH COURT / NBYJ DATED:13-12-2018 ' NOTE: POSTAFTERTWOWEEKS / FRESH NOTICE BEFORE ADMISSION ,,, CRP.NO. 1961 0F 2012 I I ,f .F

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.

Why is this linked?

This is the original judgment text, reproduced from the public court record. Always verify it against the official record before relying on it in a filing — check it on eCourts case status. ← Search more judgments