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

1997 Supreme(AP) 449

V.BHASKARA RAO
Meenavalli Balaram – Appellant
Versus
Vandlapatla Satya Pavani Vardhanamma – Respondent


V. BHASKARA RAO, J.

( 1 ) THIS revision petition arises from an order in CMA. SR. No. 3086/1997 returning the C. M. A. as not maintainable since the impugned order was passed under Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure and not covered by Order 43 Rule 1 Clause (r) of the Code of Civil Procedure.

( 2 ) THE revision petitioner is defendant in O. S. No. 486/1996 and respondent in IA. No. 2450/1996 which is filed under Order XXXIX Rule 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure for temporary injunction. The revision petitioner filed a counter therein and he is contesting the same. While that petition was pending, the respondent-plaintiff filed I. A. No. 3271 /1996 purportedly under Section 151 c. P. C. and sought for a similar remedy though styling it differently. The learned Principal District Munsif, Eluru, allowed that petition on the ground that no counter has been filed by the revision petitioner. Aggrieved by the above order, the revision petitioner filed C. M. A. before the Principal District judge, Eluru, who returned the same on the ground that C. M. A. is not maintainable. It is this order that is assailed in this revision petition.

( 3 ) THE substance of the order in I. A. No. 327












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