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

2004 Supreme(AP) 445

P.S.NARAYANA
Patchipulusu Mahalakshmi – Appellant
Versus
Nagolu Ramanamma – Respondent


P. S. NARAYANA, J.

( 1 ) DEFENDANTS 1 and 2, O. S. No. 77 of 1984 on the file of Additional district Judge, Vizianagaram moved an application in I. A. No. 2758 of 2002 under order VI Rule 17 read with Order VII rule 3 of the Code of Civil Procedure (hereinafter referred to as the Code ) praying to amend the plaint schedule by adding Item No. 5 to the plaint-A schedule.

( 2 ) THE first plaintiff, who is the mother-in-law of the first revision petitioner filed the aforesaid suit for partition of the plaint schedule properties and had died during the pendency of the suit and the daughters of the first plaintiff were brought on record as legal representatives, as plaintiffs 2 to 5 and a preliminary decree was passed for partition of plaint-A schedule immovable properties. Aggrieved by the said preliminary decree the revision petitioners - Defendants 1 and 2 preferred an appeal in A. S. No. 737 of 1987 on the file of this Court. It is also stated that this Court by judgment dated 5th day of april, 2002 had remanded the matter with certain directions and in view of the same, the said property also has to be included as Item No. 5 in the plaint-A schedule. Hence, the defendants filed the













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