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

1986 Supreme(AP) 494

P.KODANDA RAMAYYA
MATTAM PARVATHAIAH – Appellant
Versus
B. Naga Reddy – Respondent


P. KODDANDA RAMAYYA, J.

( 1 ) THE Plaintiffs are the appellants in this appeal. The suit is laid for declaration of title of the plaint schedule property and recovery of possession and also for declaration of the rights of the plaintiffs to irrigate the suit lands with the water of Timmai Cheru and Ekkaldevi Kunta and for permanent injuction restraining the defendants from causing obstruction to the enjoyment of the irrigation channels of above two sources of irrigation in the suit lands and for mandatory injunction to restore the irrigation channel that was destroyed by the defendants and to restore to its original condition and for recovery of profits, both past and future.

( 2 ) THE Plaintiff averments can be divided into two parts. One relating to title, and another relating to easementary rights. Now, it is agreed by both the counsel that the question of title may be decided in this appeal and the claim regarding the easementary rights may be left out to be decided either by the revenue authorities, or the civil court afresh. It is enough to state the averments in the plaint, regarding the title. The plaintiffs case is that they are the brothers and they are the protected tena



















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