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

1962 Supreme(AP) 123

GOPALRAO EKBOLE, P.CHANDRA REDDY
Anamik Pedda Narasanna – Appellant
Versus
Anamik Guda Dakanna – Respondent


REDDY, C. J.

( 1 ) THE appellants seek to file this appeal under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent against the order of our learned brother, Anantanarayana Ayyar, J. , refusing to grant an interim injunction restraining the respondent from obstructing the appellants from cultivating certain lands pending disposal of a second appeal preferred by the respondent against the decree of the District Judge, Mahboobnagar, confirming that of the District Munsif, dismissing the suit for recovery of possession of certain properties.

( 2 ) THE office has raised an objection as to the maintainability of the appeal on the ground that the appellants could not take advantage of Clause 15 of the Letters Patent. The two grounds urged by the office are: (i) that the order in the present case cannot be described as a judgment within the terms of Clause 15 of the Letters Patent and (ii) that as the order was made by the learned Judge in exercise of his second appellate jurisdiction the appeal without the leave of the learned Judge is incompetent.

( 3 ) IT looks to us that both these objections are to be upheld. We find it difficult to agree with the contention of the learned counsel for the appellant, Sr








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