RAMESH RANGANATHAN
SathrasalaNarsimhulu – Appellant
Versus
B. Geeta Kumar – Respondent
S.A.No.805 of 2011:
This Second Appeal is preferred against the order of the III Additional District and Sessions Judge, Anantapur in A.S. No.52 of 2007 dated 22.02.2011 dismissing the appeal preferred against the judgment and decree in O.S. No.9 of 1998 dated 11.04.2007 on the file of the Senior Civil Judge, Kadiri. The Appellant herein is the first defendant in O.S. No.9 of 1998, a suit filed by respondent - plaintiff Nos.1 and 2 herein for declaration of title and recovery of possession. (parties shall hereinafter be referred to as they are arrayed in the Suit).
2. The plaintiffs are the children of Sri B.1. Narayana Rao who died two years prior to the filing of the Suit. They had earlier filed 0.5. No.19 of 1995 seeking partition and separate possession of their 4/7th share in the joint family properties. During the pendency of the said Suit, and despite an order of injunction against the second defendant not to alienate the suit schedule property, defendant Nos.2 and 3 executed a sale deed in favour of the first defendant which, according to the plaintiffs, is hit by Section 52.of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882 (for short, 'the Act'). Even during the pendency of the
S. Sai Reddy v. S. Narayana Reddy: (1991) 3 SCC 647.
K. Venkatachala Bhat v. Krishna Nayak (D) by Lrs: 2005 (5) SCJ 75 = 2005 (6) ALT 3.4 (DN SC).
Deepa Bhargava v. Mahesh Bhargava: (2009) 2 SCC 294.
Nerusu Seetharavamma v. Nerusu Durgaiah: 2007 (4) ALT 52.
Meesala Tayaramma v. Boggavarapu Subba Rao Choultry: 2005 (4) ALT 396.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.