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

1992 Supreme(AP) 256

V.NEELADRI RAO
Adduru Dasaratha Rami Reddy – Appellant
Versus
Vamireddy Vishnu (Minor) – Respondent


V. NEELADRI RAO, J.

( 1 ) ALL these revision petitions were heard together, as the same point is involved.

( 2 ) THE point which falls for consideration is as to what security has to be furnished under O. 38, R. 6 of C. P. C. The facts Which give rise to the above point are as under: The revision petitioners herein are the defendants in OS Nos. 270/91, 223/91, 219/91,221/91,225/91 and 227/91, Principal Sub Court, Tirupathi respectively. The plaintiffs-respondents in the respective suits filed petitions under O. 38, R. 5 of C. P. C. for attachment before judgment of the properties referred to in the petitions. The lower Court ordered the revision petitioners to furnish security for the suit amounts failing which the attachment should be effected. Then Smt. B. Pandmaja the sister of the second revision petitioner agreed to furnish security for the suit amounts in all these cases. It is submitted for the surety that she is having 1/4th undivided share in the building under the name and style of Jyothi Talkies and the total value of the said building, is Rupees 33,00,000/- even as per the market value certified by the Sub Registrar and thus her share is Rs. 8,00,000. 00 and odd. When th








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