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

1992 Supreme(AP) 38

S.S.M.QUADRI, M.RANGA REDDY
Morasa Anjaiah – Appellant
Versus
Kondragunte Venkateswarlu (died) – Respondent


SVED SHAH MOHAMMED QUADRI, J.

( 1 ) THE question that arises in these civil revision petitions is; whether a party to a suit or proceeding, who fails to bring on record the legal representatives under O. 22, R. 4, or whose application under the said provision has been dismissed, can have recourse to the provisions of O. 1, R. 10 C. P. C. to implead the legal representative of the deceased party.

( 2 ) IN C. R. P. No. 3389 of 1987 the above-said question arose for consideration of a learned single Judge of this Court who felt that in view of the importance of the question the case has to be decided by a Division Bench for an authoritative pronouncement on the question.

( 3 ) AS C. R. P. No. 3390 of 1987 arises out of the same suit and raises the same question, it was directed to be posted along with C. R. P. 3389 of 1987.

( 4 ) THE respondent in the first mentioned C. r:p. filed O. S. 48 of 1984 on the file of the Subordinate Judge, Anakapalli for partition of the suit properties. Defendants 1 to 3 therein are the co-sharers. Defendants 14 to 13 are the tenants of various extents of agricultural lands which are subject matter of the suit. The 14th defendant is an alienee of the suit





























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