RAVI NATH TILHARI
C. Mamatha W/o. Subramanyam – Appellant
Versus
K. Parvathamma, W/o Late K. Reddeppa – Respondent
JUDGMENT:
1. Heard Ms. S. Parineeta, learned counsel for the petitioner.
2. The plaintiff in the suit has filed this petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. The respondents are the defendants in the suit.
3. The petitioner filed O.S.No.153 of 2021 in the Court of Principal Junior Civil Judge, Punganur for permanent injunction for the plaint schedule property.
4. The 2nd defendant (2nd respondent) filed affidavit submitting inter alia that the plaint schedule property originally belonged to his ancestors and the vendor of the plaintiff who without giving full extents and correct boundaries executed documents in favour of the plaintiff. The defendants are the coowners and there are houses, grave yard, tombs of their ancestors but suppressing the same the suit was filed to change the physical features by getting injunction order. He filed I.A.No.378 of 2023 and prayed for appointment of an Advocate Commissioner to note down the physical features as per the boundaries of survey numbers with the assistance of Mandal Surveyor.
5. The plaintiff filed the objection/counter opposing the appointment of the Advocate Commissioner.
6. The learned Principal Junior Civil Judge by order
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.