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

1996 Supreme(AP) 1282

K.B.SIDDAPPA
Parvanthamma – Appellant
Versus
Y. Tulsiram – Respondent


K. B. SIDDAPPA, J.

( 1 ) THIS Revision is filed against the order passed in O. S. S. R. No. 1903/94 on the. file of Subordinate Judge, Vikarabad.

( 2 ) THE Suit was filed for partition in respect of B and C Schedule lands and also in respect of A schedule property which was acquired and compensation was also taken away by the defendants. The lower Court, in respect of B and C schedule properties held that they are in joint possession of the plaintiffs and defendants. But in respect of A schedule property, which was acquired by the land Acquisition Ofiicer and the compensation was also distributed among the defendants, the lower Court held that it is not in joint possession of the parties. The present suit is virtually for recovery of the share of the plaintiffs from out of the compensation amount granted in respect of A schedule property. To this effect mere is an averment in the plaint also in para-5. Therefore, the lower court directed the plaintiffs to pay Court fee on each 1/10th share of the plaintiffs, on the amount of Rs. 1,97,993/- under Sec. 34 (1) of the A. P. Court Fees and Suits Valuation Act.

( 3 ) AGAINST the said order, the present Revision is filed, by the plaintiffs



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