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

2007 Supreme(AP) 822

G.YETHIRAJULU
Vegesna Ratnamma – Appellant
Versus
Chinta Venkateswarlu – Respondent


Advocates:
Advocate Appeared
Counsel for appellant: Mr. P.V.S.S.S. Rama Rao
Counsel for respondent: Mr.K. Subrahmanyam

JUDGMENT

This Second Appeal has been preferred by the plaintiff in O.S.No.7 of 1982 on the file of the District Munsiff, Narsapur. The respondent is the defendant in the suit. The plaintiff filed the suit for permanent injunction restraining the defendant and his men from interfering with the lane between the houses of the plaintiff and the defendant and to grant mandatory injunction directing the defendant to remove the eves of his tiled house extended to the lane.

2. The defendant contended that the disputed land is his exclusive lane and the plaintiff has no manner of right over the same. He further contended that there is used to be a thatched house by the time of his purchasing the house and after obtaining permission from the municipality, he constructed a tiled house in the same place at which the thatched house used to exist and as the lane exclusively belongs to him, the plaintiff has no right to ask for any relief against the defendant. Therefore, the suit is liable to be dismissed.

3. Both the parties adduced oral and documentary evidence. After perusal of the same, the trial Court dismissed the suit holding that the plaintiff is not entitled for the relief as pr



















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