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

2007 Supreme(AP) 1070

P.S.NARAYANA
Maddela Lazar – Appellant
Versus
Kopreddy Venkata Subba Reddy – Respondent


Advocates:
Advocate Appeared
Counsel appeared: S.R Sanku:Counsel for the Petitioner.

ORDER:- The civil revision petition is filed under Section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure as against an order made in LA. No.563 of 2007 in A.S. No.21 of 2007 on the file of II Additional District Judge, Kadapa at Proddutur. It is needless to say that as against an order of this nature CRP under Section 115 of the CPC is not maintainable. As can be seen from the facts, the interim injunction granted earlier had made absolute by the learned II Additional District Judge, Kadapa at Proddutur in I.A. No.563 of 2007 by order dated 28.2.2007. It is also pertinent to note that an order of interim injunction had been granted in a pending appeal by the learned II Additional District Judge, Kadapa at Proddutur. As against such order, the civil revision petition as such cannot be ma1ntained. In K. Gangulappa Naidu and others v. K. Gangi Naidu, AIR 1982 AP 284, it was held by the learned Judge of this Court as follows:

"In the instant case pending the appeal preferred against the disposal of the suit, an application under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 is filed and that application is disposed of for the first time by the appellate Court. This is not a case where against the orders under Order 39 R








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