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

2006 Supreme(AP) 795

L.NARASIMHA REDDY
G. Krishnaiah – Appellant
Versus
G. Yoganand – Respondent


ORDER

The petitioners challenge the order, dated 08-12-2003, passed by the learned Junior Civil Judge, Jedcherla, Mahaboobnagar District, in I.A.No.251 of 2003 in a.S.No.51 of 2001.

2. Respondents 1 and 2 filed the suit for the relief of declaration to the effect that the acts of respondents 3 to 9 herein are illegal and that they are in no way concerned with the Gandhinagar Trust of Badepally Village, Jedcherla Mandal. A further relief of perpetual injunction to restrain respondents 3 to 9 from interfering with the affairs of the Trust, was also sought. At a later point of time, they filed I.A.No.251 of 2003 with a prayer to implead the petitioners herein. In the affidavit filed in support of the I.A., it was stated that in C.R.P.No.5491 of 2001, this Court directed that no item of B-schedule i.e., land in survey No.69, shall be alienated and despite the same, the first petitioner sold a plot of 400 yards in favour of second petitioner. The application was opposed by the petitioners. Through the order under revision, the trial Court allowed it.

3. Sri K. Laxmaiah, learned counsel for the petitioners, submits that the first petitioner is none other than the counsel for respondents 3 t





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