Andhra Pradesh High Court – Amravati
Kurapati Akshay Kumar vs Suganya on 22 May, 2026
APHC010284382026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
AT AMARAVATI [3548]
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
FRIDAY,THE TWENTY SECOND DAY OF MAY
TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE TUHIN KUMAR GEDELA
CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO: 1585/2026
Between:
1. KURAPATI AKSHAY KUMAR, S/O SUDHEER KUMAR, R/O. PLOT
NO. 34, INDIRANAGAR COLONY, SHIVARAMPALLI JAGIR,
RAJENDRANAGAR, HYDERABAD. CURRENTLY RESIDING IN
GERMANY, REP. BY THE GPA HOLDER AND HIS FATHER,
SUDHEER KUMAR S/O KL RAGHU RAM.
2. KURAPATI (YERRAMSETTI) GAYATHRI, W/O SUDHEER KUMAR,
R/O. PLOT NO. 34, INDIRANAGAR COLONY, SHIVARAMPALLI
JAGIR, RAJENDRANAGAR, HYDERABAD.
3. KURAPATI SUDHEER KUMAR, S/O KL RAGHU RAM, R/O. PLOT
NO. 34, INDIRANAGAR COLONY, SHIVARAMPALLI JAGIR,
RAJENDRANAGAR, HYDERABAD.
4. KURAPATI ABHINAY KUMAR, S/O SUDHEER KUMAR, R/O. PLOT
NO. 34, INDIRANAGAR COLONY, SHIVARAMPALLI JAGIR,
RAJENDRANAGAR, HYDERABAD
...PETITIONER(S)
AND
1. LINGAM LALITHA, W/o Kurapati Akshay Kumar, D/o Jeevan Kumar,
R. D.no. 44-15-79/A, Thatichetlapalem, Visakhapatnam- 530 004
...RESPONDENT
Petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India,praying that in the
circumstances stated in the grounds filed herein,the High Court may be
pleased toThe above-named Revision Petitioners respectfully present this
2
GTK,J
C.R.P.No.1585 of 2026
Memorandum of Civil Revision Petition, aggrieved by the inaction of the
learned Dt Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Visakhapatnam, in
keeping pending the Interlocutory Application vide DDR No.7285 of 2025 in
D.V.C. No.36 of 2024, filed by the petitioners under Order IX Rule 7 seeking
to set aside the ex parte order and simultaneously proceeding with the
application for interim maintenance in Crl. M.P. No. 160 of 2025, filed by the
respondent, without first adjudicating the petitioners application under Order
IX Rule 7, thereby causing serious prejudice and denial of fair opportunity to
the petitioners, for the following, among other
IA NO: 1 OF 2026
Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated
in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased
Pleased to dispense with the filing of certified copies and pass
IA NO: 2 OF 2026
Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated
in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased
leased to stay all further proceedings in D.V.C. No.36 of 2024 on the file of
the learned Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Visakhapatnam,
pending disposal of the main C.R.P. and pass
Counsel for the Petitioner(S):
1. CHAITANYA PALISETTY
Counsel for the Respondent:
1.
3
GTK,J
C.R.P.No.1585 of 2026
The Court made the following Order:
Heard,
Sri Chaitanya Palisetty, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners.
2. The learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that in pursuance
to the ex parte order in D.V.C.No.36 of 2024, dated 13.03.2025, a petition is
filed bearing Crl.M.P. No.____ of 2025 in D.V.C.No.36 of 2024 indicating the
reasons why he could not be present on 13.03.2025 due to the delay caused
by the Railways which ought to have come by 07:30 A.M. has arrived at 11:30
A.M. (Hyderabad to Visakhapatnam). The said petition is filed, on 12.05.2025
and since the date of filing of the said petition kept unnumbered and reasons
are not known to the petitioners.
3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that the
matter was again called on 08.05.2026 in which the petition is allowed and
posted the matter for orders again to be called, on 28.05.2026. The said order
also indicates that the Crl.M.P. which is filed by the petitioners herein is
pending. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that the
matter is posted for orders and the Court is aware of the pendency of the
petition. As the matter is posted to 28.05.2026 and prayed this Court to direct
the Court below to number the Crl.M.P. which is filed for restoration.
4. In that pursuit the learned counsel relied upon a judgment of the
Hon’ble High Court of Madras, Madurai Bench in C.R.P.(MD) No.3215 of 2023
and C.M.P.(MD) No.16573 of 2023, dated 07.12.2023, wherein a similar issue
was dealt by the Court after following the Full Bench judgment in the case of
Arun Daniel Vs. Suganya 1, wherein the Court has held that the impugned
order of returning the M.P. in the D.V.C. petition for seeking set aside is held
as unsustainable and set aside the said order.
1
2022 SCC Online Madras 5435
4
GTK,J
C.R.P.No.1585 of 2026
5. In the present case, the grievance of the petitioners is that the Court
below has kept the Crl.M.P. pending without numbering the said Crl.M.P. and
posted the D.V.C. for orders, which is contrary to the provisions of the
Criminal Procedure Code and the law laid down by the Full Bench of the
Hon’ble High Court of Madras.
6. Since urgency is expressed by the learned counsel appearing for the
petitioners, notice to the respondent is dispensed with.
7. In view of the guided principles laid down by the Full Bench in Arun
Daniel‘s case (supra 1), the Court below shall abstain from passing orders, on
28.05.2026 to which date the matter is posted under the caption for orders,
until passing Order in Crl.M.P.No.____ of 2025 in D.V.C.No.36 of 2024.
8. Accordingly, this Civil Revision Petition is disposed of. There shall be no
order as to costs.
As a sequel, pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand
closed.
________________________
TUHIN KUMAR GEDELA, J
Date:22.05.2026
KPV
5
GTK,J
C.R.P.No.1585 of 2026
23
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE TUHIN KUMAR GEDELA
CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.1585 of 2026
22.05.2026
KPV
