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

2003 Supreme(AP) 142

P.S.NARAYANA
Gorrela Varalakshmi – Appellant
Versus
Gundu Ratnam Ratnavathi – Respondent


P. S. NARAYANA, J.

( 1 ) AT the request and with the consent of both the counsel, the main Civil miscellaneous Appeal itself is heard by this court and the same is being disposed of.

( 2 ) ). This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is filed by the unsuccessful petitioner in e. A. No. 145 of 2002 in E. P. No. 32 of 2001 in o. S. No. 7 of 2000 on the file of the Court of senior Civil Judge, Pithapuram, East godavari District.

( 3 ) THE facts in nutshell are as specified hereunder. The appellant herein, the petitioner in E. A. No. 145 of 2002 in E. P. No. 32 of 2001 in O. S. No. 7 of 2000 on the file of the senior Civil Judge, Pithapuram, is the decreeholder in E. P. No. 25 of 2002 in o. S. No. 7 of 2002 on the file of the same court. The second respondent is the judgment-debtor in both the execution petitions. The first respondent, the decreeholder in E. P. 32 of 2001 in O. S. No. 7 of 2000, brought the schedule property for sale in the said E. P. and the appellant filed an application E. A. No. 98 of 2002 praying for the relief of rateable distribution. It is stated that the first respondent gave measurements and value in the same proclamation in execution petition for part of the schedule p









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