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

2007 Supreme(AP) 329

G.ROHINI
KONETI RAMACHANDRA – Appellant
Versus
SPECIAL OFFICER-CUM-PRINCIPAL DISTRICT MUNSIF, CHITTOOR DISTRICT – Respondent


( 1 ) THIS writ petition is filed questioning the order dated 13. 4. 1995 in ata No. 1 of 1994 on the file of the Court of the Additional District Judge, Madanapalle.

( 2 ) THE facts, in brief, are as under : the father of the petitioners by name koneti Narayana Swamy along with one manikyarayappa was cultivating the lands belonging to Rani Nanjammanni. After the death of Manikyarayappa, the father of the petitioners, Narayana Swamy, continued in possession and enjoyment of the lands in question as the cultivating tenant. While so, the landlady Rani Nanjammanni died and the respondents 3 and 4 herein claiming title to the lands in question under a Will said to have been executed by rani Nanjammanni attempted to interfere with the possession of Narayana Swamy. In the circumstances, he filed O. S. No. 100 of 1979 in the Court of District Munsif, punganur, which was renumbered as O. S. No. 429 of 1979 on the file of the Court of principal District Munsif, Mandanapalle, seeking perpetual injunction restraining the respondents 3 and 4 from interfering with his possession. Pending the said suit, narayana Swamy, the father of the petitioners, died on 11. 10. 1984 and the petitioners were



















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