Dood Basha VS Moula Sab

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

BATTU DEVANAND
Dood Basha – Appellant
Versus
Moula Sab – Respondent

Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner: G. Ramachandra Reddy.
For the Respondent: Maheswara Rao Kuncheam.

ORDER :

1. This Civil Revision Petition has been filed aggrieved by the order, dated 07.04.2022 in I.A.No.79 of 2021 in A.S.No.4 of 2018, on the file of the II Additional District Judge, Kurnool at Adoni.

2. Heard Sri G. Ramachandra Reddy, learned Counsel for the Petitioners and Sri Maheswara Rao Muncheam, learned counsel for the Respondents and perused the material available on record.

3. The facts of the case are that the petitioners herein are the respondents in A.S.No.4 of 2018 on the file of the II Additional District Judge, Kurnool at Adoni, which was preferred by the 1st respondent herein (i.e., appellant in A.S.No.4 of 2018) against the decree and judgment, dated 06.01.2018 in O.S.No.153 of 2010 on the file of the Senior Civil Judge, Adoni, filed by the 1st respondent herein for permanent injunction. The petitioners herein filed I.A.No.79 of 2021 in A.S.No.4 of 2018 under Order 26 Rule 9 C.P.C. R/w Sec.151 of C.P.C. seeking to appoint an Advocate Commissioner to visit the petition schedule property and to note down the physical features and file his report. The first appellate Court after careful perusal of the entire material available on record dismissed the said applicat

Click Here to Read the rest of this document