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

2013 Supreme(AP) 1119

G.ROHINI, T.SUNIL CHOWDARY
Vadiga Amose – Appellant
Versus
Vadiga Anjaneyulu – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
Mummaneni Sreenivasa Rao, Counsel for the Petitioner; K. Chidambaram, Counsel for the Respondents.

JUDGMENT

T. SUNIL CHOWDARY, J.

This writ petition is filed seeking a writ of mandamus to declare the impugned Award dated 20.8.2005 passed by the fifth respondent in LAC No. 1049 of 2005 under Section 21 of the Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987, as illegal, void and opposed to Articles 14, 19, 21 and 300-A of the Constitution of India, on the ground that respondents 1 to 4 played fraud on the Judiciary by suppressing the joint family members of late Veeraswamy and partition settlement deed dated 31.4.2005.

2. The facts leading to filing of this writ petition, in brief, are as follows. The petitioner's mother by name Emelamma is the legally wedded wife of late Veeraswamy. The petitioner and third respondent are the sons of Emelamma and Veeraswamy. His mother went to her parents’ house for second delivery in the year 1976. Taking advantage of the same, Veeraswamy highhandedly married his sister's daughter by name Rama Lakshmi, who is the second respondent herein. Respondents 1 and 4 are the sons of Veeraswamy and Rama Lakshmi. The petitioner and respondents have been residing jointly by enjoying the ancestral property admeasuring Acs.26.17 guntas in Survey No. 425, Acs.12.27 guntas 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