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

2025 Supreme(AP) 1025

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI
TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO
Datla Rama Krishnam Raju – Appellant
Versus
Datla Surya Venkata Vijaya Gopala Raju – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioners: N. Siva Reddy.

ORDER :

TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO, J.

The sole respondent herein is the plaintiff in O.S.No.450 of 2017 on the file of the III Additional Junior Civil Judge, Vizianagaram, filed for declaration of title and for consequential relief.

2. The petitioners herein, who are the defendants in the said suit, filed I.A.No.431 of 2022 under Order VIII Rule 1(3) instead of Order VIII R-1A(3) of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, on the ground that the 1st petitioner herein-1st defendant in the suit has purchased an extent of 350 square yards which includes plaint schedule property from the mother of 1st plaintiff and other family members of plaintiff-respondent herein under the unregistered sale deed dated 18.08.2008 and the said document is essential to prove his case and also he could not file the said original unregistered sale deed before the Court along with written statement, as it was mixed with other documents and the said document was traced few days back and the said unregistered sale deed is an important document to prove his case.

3. Denying the contentions made in the affidavit filed in support of the application, the respondent herein-plaintiff filed counter asserting that the said docu

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