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

1978 Supreme(AP) 81

A.RAMANUJULU NAIDU
Paleti Sivaramakrishnayya – Appellant
Versus
Executive Engineer, N. C. Canals Sathenapalli – Respondent


( 1 ) THE plaintiff in O. S. No. 1208 of 1971 on the file of the Court of First Additional District Munsif, Guntur and the first respondent in A. S. No. 80 of 1974 on the file of the Court of First Additional District Judge, Guntur is the appellant in this second appeal.

( 2 ) THE suit filed by the plaintiff is one for injunction restraining the defendants of their associates from getting the bode Channel dug in the line shown as QS in the plaint plan or in any other direction except in the direction shown as AB in the Plaint plan as sanctioned by the Government, The plaintiff is the owner of a land in Demarcation No. 195 to the North of the land on his brother one, Paleti Veeraiah. It is his t case that the line of the field covered by Demarcation No. 195 is from the South to North. There is a canal called "53 P. B. Subminor Canal". According to the plaintiff two bode canal :according to the plaintiff two bode canals AC and AB shown in the plaint plan have their source from plaint plan have their source from "53 P. B. sub-minor canal" and they were originally sanctioned by the Government to irrigate the lands covered by Demarcation Nos. 211, 210 and 195. The first defendant who is






























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