Back
V. R. K. KRUPA SAGAR
Ponari Venkata Rao S/o. Danda Sai – Appellant
Versus
Katamreddy Malakonda Reddy S/o. Babi Reddy – Respondent
ORDER :
This Civil Revision Petition is filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India by the 2nd plaintiff in the suit that is pending before the learned trial Court. Respondent Nos.1 to 3 are defendant Nos.1 to 3 in the suit. Respondent No.4 is 1st plaintiff in the suit. Respondent No.5 is 3rd plaintiff in the suit. In this revision petition, respondent Nos.4 and 5 are shown as not necessary parties.
2. Sri T.C.Krishnan, the learned counsel for revision petitioner and Sri P.Ganga Rami Reddy, the learned counsel for respondent No.1 submitted arguments.
3. This revision assails the order dated 31.12.2018 of learned I Additional Junior Civil Judge, Nellore in I.A.No.237 of 2018 in O.S.No.107 of 2013. By the said order, the application filed by the plaintiffs was dismissed by the learned trial Court. Aggrieved by it, the present revision is filed by the 2nd plaintiff in the suit.
4. O.S.No.107 of 2013 is a suit filed by plaintiffs to declare that the suit schedule property is a public road which could be used only for public purposes and for a permanent injunction restraining the defendants from interfering with the rights of plaintiffs and the public in making use of the suit sche
The main legal point established is that the procedural rules governing witness examination, specifically Order XVIII Rule 4 C.P.C. and Sections 137 and 138 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, do not p....
The power to summon a witness as a court witness under Order XVI Rule 14 of CPC should be exercised by the court based on its satisfaction, and the dismissal of a petition would not cause any serious....
The admissibility of evidence is based on the relevance to the facts in issue or the relevant facts, as per the Indian Evidence Act.
The fundamental principle of law of evidence that a witness proposed to be examined should not be present in the Court during the cross-examination of another witness, and the trial court's obligatio....
A person who has knowledge of the facts stated in an affidavit is competent to swear an affidavit and file it in support of an application, even if the person is not a party to the suit.
The court emphasized the importance of completing the evidence within a specified period and allowing the examination of witnesses to ensure a fair trial.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
