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

2003 Supreme(AP) 878

B.SESHASAYANA REDDY
Chandana Veeranjaneyulu – Appellant
Versus
Chandana Panduranganayakamma – Respondent


B. SESHASAYANA REDDY, J.

( 1 ) THIS Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is directed against the order dated 16-12-1997 passed in I. A. No. 630 of 1997 in O. S. No. 76 of 1997 on the file of Senior Civil Judge, machilipatnam, whereby the learned Senior ciyil Judge allowed the application of the plaintiffs filed under Order 40 Rule 1 r/w Sec. 151 CPC partly and directed the defendants to pay Rs. 3,000. 00 per annum etc.

( 2 ) THE appellants herein are the plaintiffs in O. S. 76/97. They filed the suit for partition and separate possession of their shares in the suit schedule properties. They also moved LA. 630/97 under Order 40 Rule 1 r/w Section 151 CPC to appoint a receiver to take possession of A, and B schedule lands and C schedule tractor. It is the case of the appellants/plaintiffs that 1st and 2nd plaintiffs are the children of 3rd plaintiff who is wife of Satyanarayana and that the plaint A schedule property belonged to late satyanarayana. It is also the case of the plaintiff that plaint A and B schedule lands and C schedule tractor are joint family properties and therefore they are entitled to claim share. The claim of the plaintiffs is resisted by the defendants by filing counter. Th





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