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

1993 Supreme(AP) 108

P.RAMAKRISHNAM RAJU, M.N.RAO
Mohd. Safdar Shareef – Appellant
Versus
Mohd. Ali – Respondent


P. RAMAKRISHNAM RAJU, J.

( 1 ) THE question involved in this Letters Patent Appeal is, whether a Division bench hearing the Letters Patent Appeal can set aside the Judgment and remand the matter to the learned single Judge to dispose of the appeal which is the subject-matter of the L. P. A. solely for the purpose of enabling the appellants to bring the legal representatives of one of the respondents on record and to dispose of the appeal afresh.

( 2 ) THE facts which give rise to this L. P. A. are briefly stated hereunder. The respondent claiming to be the Mutuvalli of the Masjid-e-Kalam of Musheerabad, bholakpur village, Bakaram Taluq and Urban District, Hyderabad, filed o. S. No. 31 of 1969 on the file of the IV Additional Judge, City Civil Court, hyderabad against the appellant Nos. 1 to 4. Since appellant Nos. 1 to 4 died, appellant Nos. 5 to 11 were brought on record. The plaintiff s case is that the plaint schedule property which is an extent of 3150 sq. yards in Survey no. 247/1 of Bakaram village is a service Inam in respect of the said Masjid and he is the Inamdar. Originally, the first defendant occupied an extent of 1939 sq. yards, but later he occupied the adjacent land

















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