SLP(C) 11726/11 1 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO.10171 OF 2014 (Arising out of S.L.P.(C) No.11726 of 2011) Srirama Warehouses Thr. Partner Appellant(s) Versus Edulakanti Narasimha Reddy (D) Respondent(s) Thr. Lrs. and Others O R D E R Leave granted. Heard learned counsel for the appellant. None has appeared for the respondent. The facts which are essential to be stated for disposal of the present appeal are that the appellant, Srirama Warehouses, instituted O.S. No.295 of 2006 (old O.S. No.778 of 1992), for recovery of Rs.1,21,368/-, together with interest at the rate of twenty-four per cent from the date of institution of suit till the date of realisation and for costs of the suit. In the said suit, late Edulakanti Narasimha Reddy was the defendant. One, C. Manohar Reddy, had filed O.S. No.101 of 2004, for recovery of Rs.46,49,260/- together with interest at the rate of twenty-four per cent per annum, against the legal representative of Edulakanti Narasimha Reddy, the
SLP(C) 11726/11 2 respondent herein. It is not in dispute that C. Manohar Reddy, P. Chengal Reddy and S. Narsimha Reddy, are the partners and were carrying on business under the name and style of Srirama Warehouses. The appellant, C. Manohar Reddy, undisputedly is one of the partners. The learned trial Judge tried both the suits together and dismissed O.S. No.295 of 2006 and partly decreed O.S. No.101 of 2004. The present appellant preferred CCCA No.163 of 2009. The legal representatives of Edulakanti Narasimha Reddy preferred CCCA No.164 of 2009. Submission of learned counsel for the appellant is that when both the appeals were filed against the common judgement, it was advisable on the part of the High Court to hear both the appeals together and dispose of them by a singular judgement. It is urged by him that against the common judgement, when two appeals are preferred, it is always requisite that for sense of propriety they should be heard together, otherwise there would be likelihood of anomaly. Learned counsel would contend that the appeal preferred by the legal heirs of Edulakanti Narasimha Reddy is pending before the High Court. In view of the aforesaid, we think it appropriate to allow the appeal, set aside the impugned judgement and remit it to the High Court to be heard along with CCCA No.164 of 2009 and be disposed of by a common judgement. We hereby
SLP(C) 11726/11 3 make it clear that we have not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case. The appeal is, accordingly, allowed. There shall be no order as to costs. ......................J. (Dipak Misra ) ......................J. (Uday Umesh Lalit) New Delhi; November 11, 2014.
SLP(C) 11726/11 4 ITEM NO.9 COURT NO.6 SECTION XIIA S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (C) No(s). 11726/2011 (Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 06/07/2010 in CCCA No. 163/2009 passed by the High Court Of A.p At Hyderabad) SRIRAMA WAREHOUSES TR. PARTNER Petitioner(s) VERSUS EDULAKANTI NARASIMHA REDDY(D) TR. LRS. Respondent(s) (With appln. (s) for c/delay in filing process fee and interim relief and office report) Date : 11/11/2014 This petition was called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DIPAK MISRA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE UDAY UMESH LALIT For Petitioner(s) Mr. Anil Kumar Tandale, AOR For Respondent(s) UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Delay condoned. Leave granted. The appeal is allowed in terms of the signed order. (Chetan Kumar) Court Master (H.S. Parasher) Court Master (Signed order is placed on the file)
0 SLP(C) 11726/11 1 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO.10171 OF 2014 (Arising out of S.L.P.(C) No.11726 of 2011) Srirama Warehouses Thr. Partner Appellant(s) Versus Edulakanti Narasimha Reddy (D) Respondent(s) Thr. Lrs. and Others O R D E R Leave granted. Heard learned counsel for the appellant. None has appeared for the respondent. The facts which are essential to be stated for disposal of the present appeal are that the appellant, Srirama Warehouses, instituted O.S. No.295 of 2006 (old O.S. No.778 of 1992), for recovery of Rs.1,21,368/-, together with interest at the rate of twenty-four per cent from the date of institution of suit till the date of realisation and for costs of the suit. In the said suit, late Edulakanti Narasimha Reddy was the defendant. One, C. Manohar Reddy, had filed O.S. No.101 ofSignature Not VerifiedDigitally signed byChetan KumarDate: 2014.11.22 2004, for recovery of Rs.46,49,260/- together with interest12:41:02 ISTReason: at the rate of twenty-four per cent per annum, against the legal representative of Edulakanti Narasimha Reddy, theSLP(C) 11726/11 2
respondent herein. It is not in dispute that C. Manohar Reddy, P. Chengal Reddy and S. Narsimha Reddy, are the partners and were carrying on business under the name and style of Srirama Warehouses. The appellant, C. Manohar Reddy, undisputedly is one of the partners. The learned trial Judge tried both the suits together and dismissed O.S. No.295 of 2006 and partly decreed O.S. No.101 of 2004. The present appellant preferred CCCA No.163 of 2009. The legal representatives of Edulakanti Narasimha Reddy preferred CCCA No.164 of 2009. Submission of learned counsel for the appellant is that when both the appeals were filed against the common judgement, it was advisable on the part of the High Court to hear both the appeals together and dispose of them by a singular judgement. It is urged by him that against the common judgement, when two appeals are preferred, it is always requisite that for sense of propriety they should be heard together, otherwise there would be likelihood of anomaly. Learned counsel would contend that the appeal preferred by the legal heirs of Edulakanti Narasimha Reddy is pending before the High Court. In view of the aforesaid, we think it appropriate to allow the appeal, set aside the impugned judgement and remit it to the High Court to be heard along with CCCA No.164 of 2009 and be disposed of by a common judgement. We herebySLP(C) 11726/11 3 make it clear that we have not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case. The appeal is, accordingly, allowed. There shall be no order as to costs. ......................J. (Dipak Misra)
......................J. (Uday Umesh Lalit) New Delhi; November 11, 2014.SLP(C) 11726/11 4ITEM NO.9 COURT NO.6 SECTION XIIA S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGSPetition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (C) No(s). 11726/2011(Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 06/07/2010in CCCA No. 163/2009 passed by the High Court Of A.p At Hyderabad)SRIRAMA WAREHOUSES TR. PARTNER Petitioner(s) VERSUSEDULAKANTI NARASIMHA REDDY(D) TR. LRS. Respondent(s)(With appln. (s) for c/delay in filing process fee and interimrelief and office report)Date : 11/11/2014 This petition was called on for hearing today.CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DIPAK MISRA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE UDAY UMESH LALITFor Petitioner(s) Mr. Anil Kumar Tandale, AORFor Respondent(s) UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Delay condoned. Leave granted. The appeal is allowed in terms of the signed order. (Chetan Kumar) (H.S. Parasher) Court Master Court Master (Signed order is placed on the file)
T ITEM NO.43 COURT NO.9 SECTION XIIA S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (C) No(s). 11726/2011 (Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 06/07/2010 in CCCA No. 163/2009 passed by the High Court Of A.p At Hyderabad) SRIRAMA WAREHOUSES TR.PARTNER Petitioner(s) VERSUS EDULAKANTI NARASIMHA REDDY(D) TR.LRS. Respondent(s) (with appln. (s) for c/delay in filing process fee and prayer for interim relief and office report) Date : 07/07/2014 This petition was called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DIPAK MISRA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V. GOPALA GOWDA For Petitioner(s) Mr. Anil Kumar Tandale ,Adv. For Respondent(s) UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R On perusal of office note, it transpires that service is complete. Let the matter be listed for final disposal on 11.11.2014. (NAVEEN KUMAR) (RENUKA SADANA) COURT MASTER COURT MASTER Note: No appearance slip was given in the Court.Signature Not VerifiedDigitally signed byNaveen KumarDate: 2014.07.1213:04:33 ISTReason:
n ITEM NO.42 COURT NO.10 SECTION XIIA S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Civil) No(s). 11726/2011 (Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 06/07/2010 in CCCA 163/2009 passed by the High Court Of A.p At Hyderabad) SRIRAMA WAREHOUSES TR.PARTNER Petitioner(s) VERSUS EDULAKANTI NARASIMHA REDDY(D) TR.LRS. Respondents(s) (With appln.(s) for c/delay in filing process fee and Prayer for Interim Relief and Office Report) Date : 30/06/2014 This petition was called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DIPAK MISRA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V GOPALA GOWDA For Petitioner(s) Mr. Anil Kumar Tandale,Adv. For Respondent(s) UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R On perusal of the office note, it transpires that service is complete. The matter be listed on 7.7.2014 to enable the learned counsel for the petitioner to argue the matter. It is made clear that no further adjournment shall be granted. (NAVEEN KUMAR) (RENUKA SADANA) COURT MASTER COURT MASTERSignature Not VerifiedDigitally signed byNaveen KumarDate: 2014.07.0416:58:12 ISTReason:
vITEM NO.19 REGISTRAR COURT.1 SECTION XIIA S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE REGISTRAR M.A. SAYEEDPetition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Civil) No(s).11726/2011SRIRAMA WAREHOUSES TR.PARTNER Petitioner(s) VERSUSEDULAKANTI NARASIMHA REDDY(D) TR.LRS. Respondent(s)(With appln(s) for c/delay in filing process fee and prayer for interimrelief and office report)Date: 27/03/2014 This Petition was called on for hearing today.For Petitioner(s) Mr. Anil Kumar Tandale,Adv.For Respondent(s) UPON hearing counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Respondent Nos.1 to 3 are reported to be duly and properly served butnone appeared on their behalf. No further steps required. Registry to process the matter for listing before the Hon'ble Court,as per rules.| | | (M.A. SAYEED) || | |REGISTRAR || | | |rd
òITEM NO.15 REGISTRAR COURT.1 SECTION XIIA S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE REGISTRAR M.A. SAYEEDPetition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Civil) No(s).11726/2011SRIRAMA WAREHOUSES TR.PARTNER Petitioner(s) VERSUSEDULAKANTI NARASIMHA REDDY(D) TR.LRS. Respondent(s)(With prayer for interim relief and office report )Date: 12/04/2013 This Petition was called on for hearing today.For Petitioner(s) Mr. Anil Kumar Tandale,Adv.For Respondent(s) UPON hearing counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Notices be re issued to respondent Nos. 1 and 3 through theconcerned District Court in addition to postal service. Respondent No.2 is reported to be duly served through post but noneappeared nor any steps taken on his behalf. List again on 3.7.2013.| | |(M.A.SAYEED) || | |REGISTRAR |hj
ÄITEM NO.46 COURT NO.11 SECTION XIIA S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGSPetition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Civil) No(s).11726/2011(From the judgement and order dated 06/07/2010 in CCCA No.163/2009 of TheHIGH COURT OF A.P AT HYDERABAD)SRIRAMA WAREHOUSES TR.PARTNER Petitioner(s) VERSUSEDULAKANTI NARASIMHA REDDY(D) TR.LRS.&OR Respondent(s)(Office report on default)Date: 10/10/2012 This Petition was called on for hearing today.CORAM : HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE GYAN SUDHA MISRA (In Chambers)For Petitioner(s) Mr. Anil Kumar Tandale,Adv.For Respondent(s) UPON hearing counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Delay in filing the process fee and spare copies is condoned and the application for condonation of delay be treated as dispensed with.|(Hemalatha Mohan) | (Indu Bala Kapur) || Sr.P.A. | Court Master |
`ITEM NO.44 REGISTRAR COURT.1 SECTION XIIA S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE REGISTRAR S.G. SHAHPetition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Civil) No(s).11726/2011SRIRAMA WAREHOUSES TR.PARTNER Petitioner(s) VERSUSEDULAKANTI NARASIMHA REDDY(D) TR.LRS.&OR Respondent(s)(With office report)Date: 17/10/2011 This Petition was called on for hearing today.For Petitioner(s) Mr. Anil Kumar Tandale,Adv.For Respondent(s) UPON hearing counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Nobody is present for the petitioner. Petitioner has failed to confirm service upon theunserved respondents. Petitioner has also failed to complywith the earlier orders since long. Therefore, list the matter before the Hon'ble Judgein Chambers for non-prosecution. (S.G. SHAH) REGISTRARrd
\200ITEM NO.37 REGISTRAR COURT.1 SECTION XIIA S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE REGISTRAR H.B. PRABHAKARA SASTRYPetition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Civil) No(s).11726/2011SRIRAMA WAREHOUSES TR.PARTNER Petitioner(s) VERSUSEDULAKANTI NARASIMHA REDDY(D) TR.LRS.&OR Respondent(s)(With office report)Date: 11/08/2011 This Petition was called on for hearing today.For Petitioner(s) Mr. Anil Kumar Tandale,Adv.For Respondent(s) UPON hearing counsel the Court made the following O R D E R None appears. As last chance, three weeks' time is granted to thepetitioner to file process fee and spare copies of the SLP. List again on 17.10.2011. (H.B.PRABHAKARA SASTRY) REGISTRARrd
ÂITEM NO.104 REGISTRAR COURT.1 SECTION XIIA S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE REGISTRAR H.B. PRABHAKARA SASTRYPetition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Civil) No(s).11726/2011SRIRAMA WAREHOUSES TR.PARTNER Petitioner(s) VERSUSEDULAKANTI NARASIMHA REDDY(D) TR.LRS.&OR Respondent(s)(With office report)Date: 27/07/2011 This Petition was called on for hearing today.For Petitioner(s) Mr. Anil Kumar Tandale,Adv.For Respondent(s) UPON hearing counsel the Court made the following O R D E R None appears. As last chance, petitioner has to pay requisiteprocess fee and spare copies of the SLP within ten days. List again on 11.8.2011. (H.B.PRABHAKARA SASTRY) REGISTRARrd
ITEM NO.17 COURT NO.6 SECTION XIIA S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGSPetition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Civil)....../2011 CC 6625/2011(From the judgement and order dated 06/07/2010 in CCCA No. 163/2009 ofThe HIGH COURT OF A.P. AT HYDERABAD)SRIRAMA WAREHOUSES TR.PARTNER Petitioner(s) VERSUSEDULAKANTI NARASIMHA REDDY(D) TR.LRS.&OR Respondent(s) With I.A. 1 (c/delay in filing SLP and office report ))Date: 18/04/2011 This Petition was called on for hearing today.CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MARKANDEY KATJU HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE GYAN SUDHA MISRAFor Petitioner(s) Mr. Anil Kumar Tandale,Adv.For Respondent(s) UPON hearing counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Delay condoned. Issue notice. Until further orders, there shall be stay of execution proceedings. ( Rajesh Dham ) ( Indu Satija ) Court Master Court Master