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

2018 Supreme(AP) 870

M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY
G. Ramanaiah – Appellant
Versus
K. Krishnaiah – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellant : Y. Maha Lakshmi

ORDER :

M. Satyanarayana Murthy, J.

1. This civil revision petition is filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, challenging the order in IA No. 140 of 2018 in OS No. 17 of 2015 dated 29.6.2018, passed by the Junior Civil Judge, Railway Kodur, Kadapa District.

2. The petitioner is the defendant in OS No. 17 of 2015, which was filed for injunction simplicitor and this petitioner contested the suit, mainly on the ground that the suit schedule property belongs to Bobbilala Venkataiah and Bobbilala Chinnabbi, who are the brothers and they are in possession and enjoyment of the suit schedule property since long time and their names were mutated in the revenue records in Sy. No. 21/2 of an extent of Acs. 2-27 cents in the register holding certificate issued by the Sub-Registrar Office, Chitvel, Kadapa District. Further it is submitted in the affidavit in IA No. 140 of 2018 that, the respondent was never in possession of the suit schedule property, while reiterating the allegations made in the written statement, requested to appoint an Advocate Commissioner on the following ground extracted:

    "The respondent/plaintiff who is powerful person and he got five brothers and their brothe

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