Abdul Razak Miya (died) v. Abdul Gaffar @ Gaffar
Case at a glance
- Bench
- M LAXMAN
Outcome
Withdrawn
appeal is dismissed as withdrawn
Provisions considered
Judgment
4. Smt. Faheemunnisa, W/o. Md.Akbar Housewife R./o. H.No. 1-2-495, Domalguda, Liberty, Hyderabad.
5. Siddique Begum, D/o. Late Abdul Razak Miya Private Employee R/o. 18-6- 'l 1 619 12, Edibazar, Hyderabad.
6. Safia Begum, D/o. Late Abdul Razak Miya Private Employee ruo. t'A-O- 1 1 619 I 2, Edibazar, Hyderabad.
7. Ghousia Begum, D/o. Late Abdul Razak Miya Student No. 18-6-1161912, Edibazar, Hyderabad. B. Ayesha Unnisa, D/o. Late Abdul Razak Miya Student Rlo. 18-6-1161912, Edibazar, Hyderabad.
9. Md.Viquar, S/o. Late Abdul Razak Miya Student R/o. '18-6-1 16i912, Edibazar, Hyderabad. ...APPELLANTS/RESPONDENTS/DEFENDANTS ...PElloNERSl,l'.o No.1 ot 2o22 AND
Abdul Gaffar @ Gaffar, S/o. Abdul Razak Miya Business R:/o. 18-8-16, ldi Bazar, Hyderabad.
Abdul Hafeez @Abdul Maqdum Shariff, S/o. Abdul Razak Miya Mason Rl/o. 1 8-8-1 6, ldi Bazar, Hyderabad.
Abdul Majeed, S/o. AMul Razak Miya, Business Fl/o. 18-B-16, ldi Bazar, (APPELLANTS/PLAINTIFFS'l to 3 ) Hyderabad.
Abdul Jabbar, S/o. Late Abdul RAzak fvliya Govt. Employee H.no. 18-8- 450/6'1 Ashok Nagar ldibazar, Hyderabad .,.R-5/D-4 in S.A 5. Shameem Sultana, W/o. Yousuf No. 18-2-788 Kandikalgate Uppuguda, Hyderabad ...R-6/D-5 in S.A
Kallem Narsimha Reddy, S/o. Janga Reddy R/o. Nadargul Village Saroornagar Mandal, Ranga Reddy District ...R-1/D-1 in S.A (RR 4 to 6 are not necessary parties in S.A)
Gurram Narsimha Reddy. S/o. Late Gopal Reddy, Occ. Occupation, Rl/o. Gurramguda village, Saroornagar Mandal, Ranga Reddy District.
K. Harish Reddy, S/o. K. Sreeram Reddy, Occ: Business, Rl/o. Nadergul village, Sarorhnagar Mandal, Ranga Reddy District.,
tvloduguola Naga Maheshwar Reddy, S/o. Late Modugula Sundara Rami Reddy, Occ: Business, R/o. H.No '16-2-75'1 lAl2OlC, Karanabagh, Saidabad, Hyderabad. (Respondents Nos. 7 to 9 are impleaded on record vide Court order dated 1 7-'10- 2022inl.A No 1of 2019) ...RESPONDENTS in S.A. and l.A lA No: 1 gF 2g?? Petition under Order 23 Rule '1 & 3 of Cr.P.C r/w 151 of C.P.C praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit, filed in support of the petition the High Court may be pleased to permit the appellants to withdraw the above appeal, i.e, SA. No. 413 of 2012 by recording that the parties has entered into a gral co mprom ise. S.A. 413 ot 2012 Appeal under Section 100 of C.P.C against the judgment and decree dated 27- 10-2011 made in A.S No. 199 of 2008 on the file of the Court of the lll Addl. District Judge (FTC), Ranga Reddy District at L.B Nagar preferred the Judgment and Decree dated 19-07-2008 made in O.S No. 742 ot 2001 on the file of the Court of the V Additional Senior Civil Judge (FTC), Ranga Reddy District, L.B. Nagar. Counsel for the Petitioners: SRI N. Bharath Babu Counsel for Respondents 1 to 3 : Sri Resu Mahender Reddy Counsel for Respondent No.4 : Sri Y. Venugopal Reddy Counsel for the Respondents 7 to 9 : Sri Y. Ashok Raj The Court delivered the following: i THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE M.LAXMAN I.A.No. 1 of 2022 In And S.A.No.413 of 2OL2 JUDGMENT: Both the learned counsels are present and submitted that this matter has been settled between the parties outside the Court.
2. The learned counsel for the appellants submitted that they have filed I.A.No.1 of 2022 to permit the appellants to withdraw the above Second Appeal i.e., S.A.No.413 of 2Ol2 stating that the parties have entered into an oral compromise.
Operative part
3. In the light of settlement between the parties outside the Court, I.A.No.l of 2022 is allowed. .Consequently, the second appeal is dismissed as withdrawn. No costs. As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions if any, shall stand closed. //TRUE COPY// Sd/. B.S.CHIRANJEEVI JOINT REGISTRAR I rtrD SECTION OFFICER To,
1. The lll Addl. District Judge (FTC), Ranga Reddy District at L.B Nagar, Hyderabad. (with records) records)
2. The V Senior Civil Judge (FTC), Ranga Reddy District, L.B. Nagar. (With 3. One CC to Sri N. Bharath Babu, Advocate tOpUCl 4. One CC to Sri Y. Ashok Raj, Advocate tOpUCl 5. One CC to Sri Resu Mahender Reddy, Advocate tOpUCl 6. One CC to Sri Y. Venugopal Reddy, Advocate [OpUC] 7. Two CD Copies h"-'- HIGH COURT DATED:.1711012O22 JUDGMENT t.A 1 0F 2022 IN/AND SA.No.413 of 2012 I II iirE sTA /s 'r'^\ 1.r., )/-l 11 JlJt ztffi ,l:" ALLOWING THE I.A AND DISMISSING S.A AS WITHDRAWN. n A-- --{e\rz
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: appeal is dismissed as withdrawn
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973; Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 — s. 100.
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.