IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE EIGHTEENTH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE D.S.R.VARMA AND HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE R. KANTHA RAO CONTEMPT APPEAL No.1 of 2009 Between: Vedam Ravindra Babu. … Petitioner And SriBatina Subba Reddy. … Respondent The Court made the following: HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE D.S.R.VARMA AND HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE R. KANTHA RAO CONTEMPT APPEAL No.1 of 2009 ORAL JUDGMENT: - (per the Hon’ble Sri Justice D.S.R.Varma) This Court passed interim orders, as prayed for by the appellant, in C.A.M.P.(SR).No.1826 of 2009, on 17.04.2009, on the condition of the appellant depositing the fine amount. Thereafter, when the matter is coming up for admission, learned counsel for the appellant was neither present on any of the adjournments granted nor there was any representation on behalf of the appellant, and on 04.08.2009, since the learned counsel for the appellant is not present, the matter was directed to be listed on 05.08.2009, under the caption “for dismissal”. On 05.08.2009 when the matter came for admission, it was noticed that the learned counsel for the appellant was not present nor there was any representation on behalf of the appellant. However, as a last chance, the matter was posted to 17.08.2009. Even on 17.08.2009 also the learned counsel for the appellant was not present nor there was any representation. Hence, again as a last chance, the matter was posted to today again under the same caption “for dismissal”. Despite it, the learned counsel for the appellant is not present nor there is any representation on behalf of the appellant. Therefore, this Court is of the opinion that the appellant is not keen in prosecuting the matter. Hence, the appeal is dismissed for default. No order as to costs. ________________________ JUSTICE D.S.R.VARMA _________________________ JUSTICE R.KANTHA RAO 18-08-2009. Lmv