SRINIVASA CHARI, P.SATYANARAYANA RAJU, P.CHANDRA REDDY
Datla China Appalanarasimha Raju – Appellant
Versus
Nadimpalli Seethayamma Garu – Respondent
( 1 ) THE following question has been referred to the Full Bench: "what is the scope of Sub-rule (c) of Order XXXIX, Rule 1, of the Code of Civil Procedure ?" The facts which have given me to this reference may be briefly stated. In execution of the decree obtained by him in O. S. No. 28 of 1933, on the file of the Court of the subordinate Judge of Visakhapatnam, the appellant purchased two items of property subject to the rights of the Rani of Jaipur. The appellant applied for delivery of possession of those items. When notice of this application was given to the Rani, she stated that she had made a gift of them to the respondents and that therefore, she had no longer any subsisting interest in them. The Court directed delivery of the aforesaid items to the appellant. Thereupon the respondents filed O. S. No. 9 of 1955 on the file of the District Court, Visakhapatnam, for a declaration of their title in respect of the said items and for a permanent injunction restraining the appellant from taking delivery of those items. This suit was eventually dismissed and against the decree of dismissal, the plaintiffs have preferred an appeal in this Court. Pending the appeal, they f
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.