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

2006 Supreme(AP) 660

V.V.S.RAO
D. Sreenivasulu Reddy – Appellant
Versus
Vukati Bhaskar Reddy – Respondent


ORDER

The respondents 1 to 4 herein filed a suit being O.S.No.61 of 2002 for mandatory injunction on the file of the Court of the Junior Civil Judge, Sullurpet, Nellore District. The respondents 5 to 10 were arrayed as defendants. They sought for a direction to the defendants to provide pipe culverts across the road to d raw waterfrom Kuchiwada irrigation tank. The petitioners herein, who allegedly owned lands on the northern side of the road, filed application being I.A.NoA03 of 2004 under Order I Rule 10(2) of Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC) to get impleaded in the suit as necessary and proper parties. The application was dismissed on 20-1-2005. Aggrieved by the same, the present civil revision petition is filed under Article 227 of Constitution of India.

2. Learned Counsel for the petitioners raised two grounds. First, she would urge that the impugned order cannot be sustained, as no proper reasons are recorded by the trial Judge. Secondly, she would urge that when Order I Rule 10(2) CPC enables the Court to implead necessary and proper parties at any stage of the suit, the trial Judge committed an error in dismissing the application on the ground that it is belated. Per contr




















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