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

2013 Supreme(AP) 484

M.S.RAMACHANDRA RAO
Bandaru Mutyalu – Appellant
Versus
Palli Appalaraju – Respondent


Advocates appeared:
For the Petitioners:K. Subrahmanyam, Advocate.
For the Respondent:P. Veera Reddy, Advocate.

Judgment :

This revision petition is filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India challenging the order dt.18-08-2011 in I.A.No.173 of 2008 in O.S.No.448 of 2004 on the file of the Principal Junior Civil Judges Court, Srikakulam.

2. The petitioners are defendants in the suit. The suit was filed by the respondent for permanent injunction restraining the petitioners from interfering with his peaceful possession and enjoyment of the ‘ABCD’ marked front yard vacant site.

3. Pending suit, I.A.No.173 of 2008 was filed by the respondent under Order XXVI Rule 9 CPC praying for appointment of an advocate commissioner to take measurements of the property mentioned in the registered sale deed dt.28-02-1963 under which he has purchased the property and to find out whether the ‘ABCD’ plan marked vacant site is part and parcel of the property mentioned in the said registered sale deed or not with the help of a qualified surveyor.

4. The petitioners opposed the said I.A. They contended that at their instance I.A.No.968 of 2004 was filed for local inspection; that it was allowed and an advocate commissioner was appointed who executed the warrant and filed the report. It was also contended
























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