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

1991 Supreme(AP) 543

V.NEELADRI RAO
Chintapatla Arvind Babu – Appellant
Versus
K. Balakristamma alias Bhargavi – Respondent


V. NEELADRI RAO, J.

( 1 ) THE defendants in O. S. No. 7 of 1990, D. M. C. , Nagar Kurnool are the revision petitioners. The suit was filed for injunction in regard to the house bearing No. 15-30. The plaintiffs claim that the plaint schedule property belongs to the 1st plaintiff and 2nd plaintiff is the tenant therein. The defendants contend that their father Srinivasa Chari purchased plot bearing No. 44 Class D to an extent of 200 square yards under a registered sale deed No. 480/60 dated 17-5-1960 from the National Educational Society of Nahar Kurnool and constructed the house bearing Nos. 15-31, 15-33 and 15-40 after obtaining permission from f he panchayat and the 2nd defendant is their tenant in house bearing No. 15-38. It was further urged for the defendants that the father of the 1st plaintiff purchased a plot bearing No, 43 Class D of an extent of 200 spuare yards through a registered sale deed No. 470/60 dated 17-5-1960 from the same National Educational Society and constructed house bearing Nos. 15-35, 15-36 and 15-37.

( 2 ) THE defendants filed KA. No. 77 of 1990 praying for appointment of an advocate-Commissioner for localising the plots covered by 44-D and 43-D in order












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