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

1986 Supreme(AP) 131

SRIRAMULU
D. K. MURTHY – Appellant
Versus
B. V. Venkatesuchetti – Respondent


SRIRAMULU, J.

( 1 ) THIS is a defendants appeal. The plaintiff brought an actionagainst the defendants claiming declaration of title to the suit abc wall, direction to the defendants to remove the construction at point b raised on the suit wall abc and an injunction restraining them from raising further construction on their site to the South of the well abc and to the East of point b . The defendants did not dispute the title of plaintiff to the suit wall abc.

( 2 ) IT has been decided by both lower Courts as a matter of fact thatthe suit wall abc was constructed by the plaintiff and he has title to it.

( 3 ) IT is not in dispute that the plaintiff and the defendants purchasedtheir respective sites from the common owner P. W. 2 in the year 1962. Thereafter the plaintiff constructed a terraced house in the cite purchased by him and also constructed suit wall abc which divides the two sites of the plaintiff and the defendants. Both the Courts found that the entire coastruction was made by the defendants in their own site and no part of the constructed portion rests on the abc wall of the plaintiff, as alleged by him.

( 4 ) IN this appeal, the only substantial question o







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