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

2024 Supreme(AP) 1476

NYAPATHY VIJAY
A. Ramanaiah – Appellant
Versus
M. Ravindranath Reddy – Respondent


Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant : T. Sreedhar
For the Respondent: V.S.R. Murthy

Table of Content
1. filing details of a money recovery suit. (Para 1 , 2)
2. court's stance on document admissibility. (Para 3 , 5 , 6)
3. objection to document relevance. (Para 4)
4. ordering expedited trial completion. (Para 7 , 8)

JUDGMENT :

1. The present revision is filed against the order dated 25.07.2016 in IA No.205 of 2016 in OS No.203 of 2014 passed by the VII Additional District Judge, Gudur.

2. The petitioner is the defendant and the suit was filed for recovery of money. In the course of trial, the plaintiff filed IA No.205 of 2016 to receive the documents under Order 13 Rule 2 C.P.C. This application was opposed by the petitioner and the Trial Court after hearing the contentions of respective parties, allowed the I.A., on payment of costs of Rs.500/- by the plaintiff, out of which, a sum of Rs.300/- is payable to the Mandal Legal Services Authority, Gudur and Rs.200/- to the other side. Hence, the revision petition is filed.

3. Heard Sri T. Sreedhar, learned Counsel for the petitioner and Sri V.S.R. Murthy, learned Counsel for the respondent.

4. The primary objection for marking the documents is that they are not relevant for the purpose of the case as the previous conduct of t

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