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

2005 Supreme(AP) 454

L.NARASIMHA REDDY
Rukya Bee – Appellant
Versus
Syed Afzal – Respondent


L. NARASIMHA REDDY, J.

( 1 ) THE plaintiffs in O. S. No. 170 of 1991, on the file of the Junior Civil Judge, Zaheerabad, are the petitioners herein. They challenge the order dated 11-10-2004 passed by the trial Court, impleading the first petitioner (sic. respondent) herein as one of the parties to the suit.

( 2 ) THE suit was filed by the petitioners herein for the relief of partition and separate possession of the suit schedule property against the respondents 2 to 5 herein, the defendants. A preliminary decree was passed on 19-7-1995, directing that the petitioners on the one hand, and the respondents 2 to 5 on the other hand, shall be entitled to two equal shares in the suit schedule property. The respondents 2 to 5 herein filed A. S. No. 32 of 1995, in the Court of District Judge, Medak at Sanaareddy, and it was dismissed on 25-8-2000. Aggrieved by the same, the respondents 2 to 5 filed S. A. No. 129 of 2001, and it was also dismissed by this Court on 8-2-2002 Thereafter, the petitioners filed i. A. No. 43 of 2003, in the trial Court, praying for final decree.

( 3 ) AT that stage, the first respondent filed I. A. No. 59 of 2004, under Order 1 Rule 10 C. P. C. , with a prayer to






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