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

2016 Supreme(AP) 115

A.V.SESHA SAI
Molli Eswara Rao – Appellant
Versus
Kurcha Chandra Rao – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner:G. Rama Gopal, Advocate.

JUDGMENT :

1. This revision filed by the defendant in O.S.No.35 of 2007 on the file of the Court of Principal Junior Civil Judge, Chodavaram, challenges the order dated 13.07.2011, allowing I.A.No.273 of 2011 in O.S.No.35 of 2007 filed by the plaintiff/respondent herein under the provisions of Order VI Rule 17 of the Code of Civil Procedure (for short ‘C.P.C’). Heard Sri G. Rama Gopal, learned counsel for the petitioner. Despite service of notice, none appears for the respondent. The respondent herein instituted O.S.No.35 of 2007 for specific performance of an agreement of sale alleged to have been executed by the petitioner. In the said suit, the respondent filed the present Interlocutory Application under Order VI Rule 17 C.P.C., seeking amendment of the description of the plaint schedule property by way of insertion of Survey Number and Patta Number. The learned Judge allowed the said amendment by way of the order impugned in the instant revision.

It is contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the order impugned is erroneous, contrary to law and opposed to the very spirit and object of the provisions of Order VI Rule 17 C.P.C; that in view of the prohibition contai























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