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

2023 Supreme(AP) 1415

K. MANMADHA RAO
District Collector – Appellant
Versus
V Raghunathan – Respondent


Advocates appeared:
P.Chandra Mouli, Advocate, M.V.J.Kumar, Advocate

JUDGMENT

1. The present Second Appeal is preferred by the appellants aggrieved by the Decree and Judgment dtd. 9/9/2014 passed in A.S.No.1 of 2004 on the file of the Principal Senior Civil Judge, Tirupathi, confirming the decree and judgment dtd. 5/8/2002 passed in O.S No.49 of 1991 on the file of the Principal Junior Civil Judge, Puttur.

2. The appellants herein are the defendants and the respondent herein is the plaintiff in O.S.No.49 of 1991 on the file of Principal Junior Civil Judge, Puttur (for short "the trial Court").

3. For convenience the parties are hereinafter referred to as arrayed before the Principal Senior Civil Judge, Tirupathi (for short "the first appellate Court") in A.S.No.1 of 2004.

4. Brief facts of the case are that the plaintiff filed O.S No.49 of 1991 before the trial Court for grant of declaration declaring that the amendment made to the original notification No.351, dtd. 3/8/1952 vide G.O.Ms.No.726 (Revenue) dtd. 10/8/1967 published in A.P. Gazette, dtd. 31/8/1967 as invalid and not binding upon the plaintiff and also for granting permanent injunction restraining the defendants and their sub-ordinates not to interfere with the plaintiff's peaceful possess

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