SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2003 Supreme(SC) 375

R.C.LAHOTI, ARUN KUMAR
T. Lakshmipathi – Appellant
Versus
P. Nithyananda Reddy – Respondent


JUDGMENT

R.C. Lahoti, J.-A decree for eviction passed in favour of the respondent No. 1 on the grounds available under Section 10(2)(i) and 10(3)(b)(iii) of A.P. Buildings (Lease, Rent & Eviction) Control Act, 1960 by the courts below and upheld by the High Court is under challenge in this appeal by special leave, filed by the persons in occupation of the premises. The facts of the case are complex and litigations between the parties are multiple. It will be useful to notice in brief the several litigations between the parties which will have an incidental bearing on the principal controversy and would enable precise appreciation of the facts.

2. The suit premises are non-residential bearing Door No. 18-7-4 situated in Ponniamman Koli Street of Chittoor town. This property was initially owned by one P. Nayarana Reddy. In the year 1959 a suit was instituted for partition of certain joint family properties wherein the suit property was one of the items. P. Narayana Reddy had two sons, namely, P. Nithyananda Reddy, the respondent No.1 and P. Manohar Reddy and five daughters. Late P. Narayana Reddy, his wife and his two sons were arrayed as plaintiffs. Partition of joint family propertie



































Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top