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

1956 Supreme(AP) 169

Katragadda Venkaiasubbayya – Appellant
Versus
Katragadda Virayya – Respondent


BHIMASANKARAM, J.

( 1 ) THIS is an appeal under the Letters Patent against the decision of a single Judge of this Court. The facts have been fully and clearly set out in his judgment, a report of which is to be found in 1955 Andhra Law Times 243 (Civil ). The only point for determination in this appeal is whether the suit on the file of the Subordinate Judge s Court, Tenali, out of which the present appeal arises instituted by the respondent-plaintiff is barred by res judicata because of an earlier suit, O. S. No. 318 of 1939 on the file of the District Munsif s Court, Repalle, which he himself had instituted.

( 2 ) THE controversy relates to only one item of property described as item 2 of the plaint schedule. This item was the same as item 8 in the A schedule, to the plaint in the previous suit and it comprises Ac. 1-43 cents of wet land covered by demarcation no. 1154/5-B of Intur village. The respondent sought the relief of partition in respect of 8 items of the property described in that schedule and the first issue in o. S. No. 318 of 1939 was whether the suit properties were properties belonging to the joint family of the plaintiff and the defendant. That issue was decided a

























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