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

2003 Supreme(AP) 1192

B.S.A.SWAMY, D.S.R.VERMA
Tavidisetty Venkateswara Rao – Appellant
Versus
Tavidisetty Nageswara Rao – Respondent


D. S. R. VARMA, J.

( 1 ) THIS Letters Patent Appeal is directed against the decree and judgment made in a. S. No. 2698 of 1993, dated 29-11 -2001, of a learned single Judge of this Court.

( 2 ) THE above A. S. No. 2698 of 1993 arose out of the decree and judgment made in o. S. IMo. 254 of 1988, dated 11-8-1993, on the file of the Subordinate Judge, vijayawada, which was filed by the plaintiff for partition and possession of half share in the plaint schedule property and for profits. Aggrieved by the decree for partition and possession, the appellant in A. S. No. 2698 of 1993 brought the said appeal, which was ultimately dismissed, confirming the decree and judgment of the Subordinate Judge, vijayawada, made in O. S. No. 254 of 1988, by the learned single Judge of this Court. Having been aggrieved by the judgment of the learned single Judge, the present Letters patent Appeal is preferred by the defendant in O. S. No. 254 of 1988 and the appellant in a. S. NO. 2698 of 1993 on the file of this Court.

( 3 ) FOR the sake of convenience, the parties will be referred to as arrayed in the suit.

( 4 ) TO appreciate the rival contentions that have been canvassed before us, it would be necess





































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