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

2012 Supreme(SC) 260

DEEPAK VERMA, K.S.P.RADHAKRISHNAN
S. GANESHARAJU (DEAD) THROUGH – Appellant
Versus
NARASAMMA (DEAD) THROUGH – Respondent


Advocates:
.

ORDER

1. Delay in filing and refiling special leave petitions is condoned.

SLP(C) No. 26538 of 2009:

Leave granted.

2. The Appellants were Defendants along with other Respondents before XXII Additional City Civil Judge, Bangalore City in O.S. No. 3684 of 1992 decided on 13.7.2005. The said suit was filed by S. Chandra Raju and Ors. claiming partition with regard to suit property. The suit was dismissed by the Trial Court. Against it, Plaintiffs preferred R.F.A. No. 1476 of 2005 in the High Court of Karnataka at Bangalore, which came to be disposed of by learned Single Judge on 15.7.2008. The relevant operative part of the said order is reproduced hereinbelow:

10. Liberty is reserved to the Plaintiffs representing the branch of S. Munuswamyraju to approach the Bangalore Development Authority for reconveyance of site No. 777 and Defendants 1(a) to (g) in respect of site No. 777A. As per the request of S. Narasaraju the then CITB re-conveyed the site No. 290A in favour of his daughter the 4th Defendant herein. The Plaintiffs and other Defendants cannot have any right in respect of site No. 290A re-conveyed to 4th Defendant. So also, the Defendants cannot have any objections for the Plainti






















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