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

1998 Supreme(AP) 273

S.S.HUSSAINI
Bongu Ramulu – Appellant
Versus
Gudur Narender Reddy – Respondent


S. S. HUSSAINI, J.

( 1 ) HEARD the learned Counsel for the petitioners.

( 2 ) IT is submitted by Mr. P. Sree Rama Moorthy, learned Counsel for the petitioners that the petitioners are defendants 2 and 3 in the suit OS No. 1/98 on the file of the Junior Civil Judge, Ramannapet. The respondent, alongwith the suit, filed an interlocutory application IA 2/98 to restrain the petitioners from interfering with his possession over the suit land. But, the trial Court did not grant the interim directions and ordered notice on the said application. It is also stated by the learned Counsel for the petitioners that no written statement has been filed in the suit till this date. That being so, the defendants 2 and 3 filed an application IA 77/98 before the trial Court in the suit for appointment of an Advocate Commissioner under Order XXVI, Rule 10, read with 151 CPC to ascertain as to who is in possession of the suit property as on the date of the presentation of the suit and also to note down the physical features and material evidence available at the suit land for the just and proper disposal of the petition filed for temporary injunction.

( 3 ) THE learned Junior Civil Judge, after hearing b






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