Back
K. SREENIVASA REDDY
K. Subbarayudu Naidu – Appellant
Versus
K. Subba Naidu – Respondent
ORDER :
K. Sreenivasa Reddy, J.
1. A.S. No. 526 of 2021 is preferred challenging the Judgment and Decree dated 28.03.2011 passed in Original Suit No. 17 of 2003 on the file of the Principal District Judge, Kadapa.
2. 1st respondent in the A.S. filed the aforesaid suit against appellants in the A.S., seeking partition of the plaint schedule properties into three equal shares and to allot one such share to him. Vide the Judgment dated 28.03.2011, the trial Court decreed the suit, passing a preliminary decree, declaring that 1st respondent/plaintiff is entitled for 1/3rd share in the suit schedule properties.
3. In the Appeal Suit, vide Order dated 25.08.2011 in A.S.M.P. No. 1830 of 2011, this Court granted stay of passing of final decree alone, by observing that all other proceedings may go on.
4. During pendency of the A.S., appellant No. 1 and sole respondent died. Appellants 4 to 6 were brought on record as legal representatives of deceased appellant No. 1, vide Order dated 24.03.2023 in I.A. No. 4 of 2022. Respondents 2 to 4 were brought on record as legal representatives of deceased respondent, vide Order dated 24.03.2023 in I.A. No. 6 of 2022.
5. For sake of convenience, the parties
Injunction - Mere occupation of a portion or entire joint family property by one co-owner does not amount to ouster of other co-owner from said property.
A co-owner can seek injunction against another co-owner to prevent wrongful dispossession, contrary to the trial court's ruling that denied such relief.
(1) Law permits a co-sharer to continue to remain, ad infinitum, in exclusive possession of a particular parcel and, subject to well recognised prohibitions, even make constructions on it. Exclusive ....
remedy of a co-owner not in possession, or not in possession of a share of the joint property, is by way of a suit for partition or for actual joint possession, but not for ejectment. Same is the cas....
One co-sharer out of the many has no right to build on which is joint land without the consent of others notwithstanding that, the erection of such building may cause no direct loss to other joint ow....
The relief of injunction is a discretionary relief, and the scope for interference in appeal is limited.
A plaintiff can obtain a permanent injunction against defendants interfering with her possession if exclusive ownership is established through revenue records, even amidst claims of co-ownership.
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
