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

2004 Supreme(AP) 887

L.NARASIMHA REDDY
I. D. P. L. EMPLOYEES CO-OP. HOUSE BUILDING SOCIETY – Appellant
Versus
B. Rama Devi – Respondent


L. NARASIMHA REDDY, J.

( 1 ) IN all these applications, similar questions of fact and law are involved. Hence, they are disposed of through a common order. There are four sets of identical applications filed by individuals in some cases and groups in others. Each of them filed two applications, one with a prayer to implead them as defendants in C. S. No. 14 of 1958 and the other, to recognize the assignments of the decrees said to have been made in their favour, in respect of various extents of land in Survey No. 163 of Hydernagar, rangareddy District.

( 2 ) THE background, in which, the applications came to be made may briefly be stated as under:

( 3 ) INITIALLY C. S. No. 14 of 1958 was filed in the City Civil Court, Hyderabad for partition of the suit schedule properties. It related to vast extent of properties held by late Khursheed Jah. The estate is known as paigah, after his name. It was withdrawn to this Court. During the course of the trial of the same, majority of the parties filed applications to record the compromise entered into between them. A preliminary decree was passed on 28. 6. 1963.

( 4 ) SOME of the parties to the preliminary decree transferred their rights in res



































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