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

2012 Supreme(AP) 793

B.N.RAO NALLA
Angati Tatayya s/o. Appanna – Appellant
Versus
Vakada Sanyasirao s/o. China Appanna – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellant:M. Radha Krishna, Advocate.

Judgment :

This revision is filed against the order dated 12.11.2009 in I.A. No.174 of 2009 in O.S. No.327 of 2001 on the file of the II Additional Junior Civil Judge -cum-Additional Metropolitan Magistrate, Anakapalli.

2. The revision petitioner is the plaintiff and the respondent is the defendant in the suit in O.S. No.327 of 2001. The suit is filed for permanent injunction restraining the respondent and his men from interfering with his peaceful possession and enjoyment over the plaint schedule property. The revision petitioner filed I.A. No.174 of 2009 under Order 6 Rule 17 of Civil Procedure Code for amendment of names of neighbours of southern and western boundaries of the suit schedule property, and for recovery of possession etc.

3. The case of the revision petitioner is that after filing the suit, it was found that in the plaint schedule, the surnames on south and west neighbours were wrongly mentioned due to mistake. The southern neighbours are Somulamma and Golagani Appalanaidu.

The surname of Somulamma was mentioned by mistake as Koyya instead of Murukuti, and another existing owner on south was not mentioned. Somulamma is popularly known as Koyya Somulamma because she i






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