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

2004 Supreme(AP) 1112

ELIPE DHARMA RAO
Bikkina Satyzanarayana – Appellant
Versus
Reddy Lakshmi – Respondent


( 1 ) (APPEAL under Section 100 of CPC against the decree in A. S. No. 32 of 1996 dt. 11. 3. 2002 on the file of the Court of the Senior Civil Judge, Ramachandrapuram E. G. District preferred against the decree in O. S. No. 55 of 1989 dt. 16. 07. 1996 on the file of the court of the District Munsif, Alamuru E. G. District.) aggrieved by the judgment and decree of the Senior Civil Judge, Ramachandrapuram, East Godavari District in Appeal Suit No. 32 of 1996, dated 11-03-2002, wherein the learned Senior Civil Judge, after reappraisal of both the oral and documentary evidence available on record, reversed the finding arrived at by the District Munsif, Alamuru, East Godavari District in O. S. No. 55 of 1989, dated 16-7-1996, the present second appeal is filed.

( 2 ) FOR the sake of convenience, the parties herein are referred to as arrayed in the trial Court. The facts leading to filing of the above second appeal, briefly narrated, are that the plaintiff is the owner of the plaint schedule property by virtue of the registered sale deed dated 29-5-1981 along with some other properties that are situated to the north of the plaint schedule property. She purchased the said site from one Pa












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